(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Department of Transportation and related agencies appropriations for fiscal year 1994 : hearings before a subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, United States Senate, One Hundred Third Congress, first session, on H.R. 2490/2750 ..."

\^^^ 



S. Hrg. 103-291, Pt. 4 



Senate Hearings 

Before the Committee on Appropriations 



Y4.AP 6/2; B. HRG. 103-291/ 

Oepartnent of Transfortatioi mi Re. 



Department of 
Transportation and Related 
Agencies Appropriations 



Fiscal Year 



1994 



1 Q ^</ CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION 



H.R. 2490/2750 



■"^CDOQ; 



PART 4 (Pages 2437-2852) 

NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES 



my 2 H mh 



S. Hrg. 103-291, Pt. 4 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND REUT- 
ED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL 
YEAR 1994 



HEARINGS 

BEFORE A 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 
UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 
ON 

H.R. 2490/2750 

AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANS- 
PORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING 
SEPTEMBER 30, 1994, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 



PART 4 (Pages 2437-2852) 

Nondepartmental witnesses 



Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations 




U.S. GOVER>fMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
76-693 cc WASHINGTON : 1994 

For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office 
Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402 
ISBN 0-16-043973-6 



COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 
ROBERT C. BYRD, West \rirginia, Chairman 



DANIEL K. INOUYE. Hawaii 

ERNEST F. ROLLINGS. South CaroUna 

J. BENNETT JOHNSTON. Louisiana 

PATRICK J. LEAHY. Vermont 

JIM SASSER, Tennessee 

DENNIS DeCONCINI, Arizona 

DALE BUMPERS, Arkansas 

FRANK R. LAUTENBERG. New Jersey 

TOM HARKIN, Iowa 

BARBARA A MIKLTLSKI, MaryUnd 

HARRY REID, Nevada 

J. ROBERT KERREY, Nebraska 

HERB KOHL, Wisconsin 

PATTY MURRAY, Washington 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 



MARK O. HATFIELD, Oregon 
TED STEVENS, Alaska 
THAD COCHRAN. Mississippi 
ALFONSE M. I^AMATO, New York 
ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania 
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico 
DON NICKLES, Oklahoma 
PHIL GRAMM, Texas 
CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri 
SLADE GORTON, Washington 
MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky 
CONNIE MACK, Florida 
CONRAD BURNS, Montana 



James H. English, Staff Director 

Mary S. Dewald, Chief Clerk 

J. Keith Kennedy, Minority Staff Director 



Subcommittee on Transportation and Related Agencies 

FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey, Chairman 
ROBERT C. BYRD, West \rirginia ALFONSE M. I^AMATO. New York 

TOM HARKIN. Iowa PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico 

JIM SASSER. Tennessee MARK O. HATFIELD, Oregon 

BARBARA A MIKULSKI. Maryland ARLEN SPECTER. Pennsylvania 

Professional Staff 

Patrick J. McCann 

Peter Rogoff 

Anne M. Miano (Minority) 

Administrative Support 

Joyce C. Rose 



OD 



CONTENTS 



National Organizations 

Page 

America's Coalition for Transit NOW 2438 

American Public Transit Association 2442 

American Trucking Associations, Inc 2448 

American Association of Airport Executives and the Airports Council Inter- 
national-North America 2456 

Center for Marine Conservation 2463 

Community Transportation Association of America 2472 

National Air Transportation Association 2475 

National Association of Railroad Passengers 2488 

National Association of State Boating Law Administrators 2491 

National Easter Seal Society 2494 

Reserve Officers Association of the United States 2497 

Individual Projects, Requests by Cities and States 

Advanced Navigation and Positioning Corp., Hood River, OR 2503 

Atlanta, GA: Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority [MARTA] 2506 

Chicago, IL: 

Department of Aviation 2520 

Central Area Circulation F*roject 2523 

Metra Commuter Rail 2540 

Clark Covmty, NV: Regional Transportation Commission 2569 

Dallas, TX: 

Dallas Area Rapid Transit Authority 2573 

Dallas-Fort Worth Railtran 2587 

Denver, CO: 

23rd Street Viaduct Replacement Project 2590 

Colorado Department of Transportation 2592 

Dowling College, Oakdale, NY 2599 

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University 2607 

Fort Berthold Indian Reservation 2621 

Georgetown University 2625 

Georgia Department of Transportation 2627 

Illinois Department of Transportation 2699 

Indianapolis, IN: Citizens for Appropriate Rural Rioads [CARR] 2709 

Inter American University of Puerto Rico 2746 

Jacksonville, FL: Jacksonville Transportation Authority 2750 

Los Angeles, CA: 

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2756 

Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce 2763 

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2766 

Memphis, TN: Memphis Area Transit Authority 2767 

Metropolitan Dade County, FL 2772 

New Orleans, LA: Regional Transit Authority 2784 

Orlando, FL: 

Greater Orlando Aviation Authority 2793 

The OSCAR Project 2819 

Pittsburgh, PA: Port Authority of Allegheny County 2823 

Seminole, Osceola, and Orange Counties, FL 2836 

Spaceport Florida Authority 2837 

St. Louis, MO: Metro Link Rail Project 2842 

University of North Dakota 2844 

(III) 



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RE- 
LATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 
FISCAL YEAR 1994 



U.S. Senate, 
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, 

Washington, DC. 

NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES 

The following testimonies were received by the Subcommittee on 
Transportation and Related Agencies for inclusion in the record. 
The submitted materials relate to the fiscal year 1994 budget re- 
quest. 

The subcommittee requested that public witnesses provide writ- 
ten testimony because, given the Senate schedule and the number 
of subcommittee hearings with Department witnesses, there was 
not enough time to schedule hearings for nondepartmental wit- 
nesses. 

(2437) 



2438 

NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS 

AMERICA'S COALITION FOR TRANSIT NOW 

STATEMENT OF ROBERT CLARKE BROWN, SENIOR VICE 
PRESIDENT, LEHMAN BROTHERS, PUBLIC FINANCE 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to submit 
testimony as an outside witness. My name is Robert Clarke Brown. 
I am a Senior Vice President of Lehman Brothers' transportation 
group, which is part of the Firm's public finance investment 
banking department. Lehman Brothers provides investment banking 
and financial advisory services to public agencies throughout the 
United States, particularly those engaged in financing 
transportation and other infrastructure facilities. We are one of 
the 179 firms and organizations that are members of America's 
Coalition for Transit NOW. 

Lehman Brothers is pleased to be an active partner in the 
Transit NOW Coalition which includes business and environmental 
interests, health care and disability groups, financial 
institutions and a broad range of other interests. What brings us 
together in this Coalition is a belief that public transit offers 
opportunities for improving the economy, increasing the mobility 
and productivity of this nation's workforce, and has a positive 
impact on the environment and health care costs. 

Transit NOW has been active in reaching out to those not 
ordinarily associated with mass transit to energize support for the 
passage and effective implementation of the Intermodal Surface 
Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) , the transit pass provisions 
that were contained in last year's Comprehensive Energy Policy Act, 
as well as budget and appropriations initiatives that will increase 
funding for transit programs. A complete listing of Transit NOW 
members is being provided for the record with this statement. 

Transit NOW enthusiastically supports the President's FY 1994 
budget request of $4.6 billion in funding for the Federal Transit 
Administration. The budget document notes that "this funding level 



2439 



will provide a stable resource for needed capital investment at 
transit systems of all sizes and for operating assistance." We 
share that view. As someone familiar with investment, I can tell 
you that a stable source of funding is critical to a sound, future- 
oriented infrastructure policy. 

The $4.6 billion proposed for FTA funding will assist in the 
replacement of over-age transit vehicles, allow investments to be 
made in capital improvements and necessary support facilities, and 
permit the operators of rail transit systems to continue to upgrade 
and modernize their systems. Importantly, this level of funding 
will also allow transit operators to implement transit related 
provisions contained in the Americans with Disabilities Act and the 
Clean Air Act. I should point out, however, that the 
Administration has not requested an increase in operating 
assistance caps. As you are aware, these caps have not increased 
in 10 years. Operating assistance is important for meeting the new 
requirements for implementation of the Americans with Disabilities 
Act (ADA) as well as new drug and alcohol testing provisions. 
While setting important goals, these unfunded mandates may cause a 
serious strain on the budgets of transit systems throughout the 
country. 

This request makes significant strides toward the realization 
of flexible and increased funding goals set out under the 
Intermodal Surface Transportation and Efficiency Act (ISTEA) . 
Transit NOW considers ISTEA the single most important piece of 
transportation legislation since the Urban Mass Transportation Act 
was signed into law more than 25 years ago, with the exception, of 
course, being your FY 1994 appropriations bill. The Coalition's 
principal goal is to work toward full funding of ISTEA if not for 
FY 1994, certainly for FY 1995. It is Transit NOW's view that the 
funding levels set out in ISTEA more accurately reflect true 
transit needs. 

President Clinton's proposal is in sharp contrast to the 12 
previous years' budget requests, which have been significantly 



2440 



below the level of actual Congressional appropriation action. 

Mr. Chairman, I am aware that this Subcommittee has strongly 
supported transit funding in the past. I realize, however, that 
you face difficult resource allocation decisions among the various 
competing needs within the jurisdiction of your bill. Transit NOW 
believes that your strong support for transit funding is necessary 
and warranted. We are willing to work on your behalf for increased 
transit funding by developing support from other Members of the 
Senate, Members of the House, and the public for enthusiastic 
support of your bill and the $4.6 billion funding request for 
transit. 

Thank you for this opportunity to testify in support of the FY 
1994 budget request for the Federal Transit Association. 

Transit NOW Members 



As or May 20. 1993 

ABB Traction Inc. 

A.B.P. Inc. 

ACUSON 

Aclna Insurance Company 

Alliance of American Insurers 

Alliance for a Paving Moratorium 

Alliance lo Save Energy 

Amalgamated Transit Union, AFL-CIO 

American Association on Mental 

Retardation 
American Chamber of Commerce 

Executives 
American Council of the Blind 
American Consulting Engineers Council 
American Institute Of Architects 
American Insurance Association 
American Lung Association 
American Pedestrian Association 
American Planning Association 
American Public Health Association 
American Public Transit Association 
Amphion Environmental, Inc. 
Angeles Corporation 

Association for Commuter Transportation 
Association for Public Transportation, Inc. 
AsscKiation for Retarded Citizens of the 

United Stales 
ACORN-Association of Community 

Organizations for Reform Now 
Atlanta Chamber of Commerce 
Atlantic Track and Turnout Co. 
AVX Corporation 
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. 
Bay Area Council 



Bear Stearns & Co. 

Building Owners and Management 

Association International 
Cartwright & Goodwin, Inc. 
Catholic Golden Age 
Central Hudson Gas & Electric 

Corporation 
Chase Securities, Inc. 
Chemical Securities, Inc. 
Chicago A.s.socialion of Commerce 

and Industry 
Child Welfare League of America 
Coach and Car Equipment 

Corporation 
Community Transportation 

Association of America 
Computer & Communication 

Industry Association 
Consoer, Townsend & As.sociates 
Conservation Foundation of DuPage 

County 
Consumer Federation of America 
Dames & Moore 
Daniel, Mann, Johnson & 

Mendenhall 
De Lcuw, Cathcr & Company 
Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. 
Del-Jen Inc. 
Deloittc & Touche 
Delon Hampton & Associates 
Detroit Diesel Corporation 
The Detroit Edison Company 
Dillon, Read & Co., Inc. 



2441 



Disability Rights Education and 

Defense Fund 
Dumoni Electrical Inc. 
Edison Electric Institute 
Ehrlich Bobcr & Co., Inc. 
Electrack Division of 

EMJ/McFarland-Johnson 
Engineers, Inc. 
Epilepsy Foundation of America 
Fluor Daniel, Inc. 
Frederick R. Harris, Inc. 
The First Boston Corporation 
The Flrible Corporation 
Gannett Fleming, Inc. 
GenCorp Polymer Products 
General Electric 
Giggs & Hill, Inc. 
Goldman, Sachs & Co. 
Goodwill Industries of America, Inc. 
Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce 
Greater Philadelphia First Corporation 
Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. 
High Speed Rail Association 
Hewlett-Packard 

Howard, Needles, Tammen & Bergendoff 
Hughes Aircraft Company 
ICF Kaiser Engineers, Inc. 
Indiana Transportation Association 
Indianapolis Power & Light Company 
Industrial Unions Department, AFL-CIO 
Institute for Transportation & Development Policy 
Institute for Urban Transportation 
JHK & Associates, Inc. 
J. P. Morgan Securities 
J.W. Leas & Associates 
The Keith Companies 

Kathcrinc McGuinness & Associates, Inc. 

KPMG Peat Marwick 

La7ard Freres & Co. 

Lebcnthal & Co., Inc. 

Lomarado Group 

LS Transit Systems, Inc. 

Luminator, A MARK IV INDUSTRIES Company 

Manufacturers Hanover Securities Corporation 

Marin Rainbow Coalition 

Marine Midland Banks, Inc 

Marlowe & Company 

Mental Health Law Project 

Merrill Lynch Capital Markets 

Metropolitan Planning Council of Chicago 

Midwest Bus Rebuilders, Corp. 

Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc 

Morrison Knudsen Corporation 

M.R. Beal & Company 

National As.sociation of Area Agencies on Aging 

National Association of Counties 

National Association of Development Disabilities 
Councils 

National Association of Families Caring for Elders 

National Association of Independent Insurers 

National Association of Industrial and Office Parks 

National Association of Private Residential 
Resources 

National Association of Protection and Advocacy 
Systems 

National Association of Transit Consumer 
Organizations 



National Association of Meal Programs 

National Association of Nutrition and Aging Service 

Programs 
National Association of Railroad Passengers 
National Association of Regional Councils 
National Consumers League 
National Council of Senior Citizens 
National Council on the Aging 
National Council on Independent Living 
National Easter Seal Society 
National Growth Management Leadership Project 
National Industries for the Severely Handicapped 
National Interstate Insurance Agency, Inc 
National Jobs with Peace Campaign 
National League of Cities 
National Multiple Sclerosis Society 
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association 
National Urban Coalition 
National Urban League 
National Women's Political Caucus 
The Nettleship Group 
New Flyer Industries, Ltd. 
New York Building Congress 
New York Chamber of Commerce and Industry 
New York City Partnership 
Older Women's League 
Paine Webber Incorporated 
Paralyzed Veterans of America 
Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. 
Penn-Soft Services, Inc 
Philadelphia electric Company 
Portland General Corporation 
Portland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce 
The Promus Companies 
Public Financial Management, Inc. 
Pryor, McClendon, Counts, & Co., Inc. 
Read Communications 
Renew America 
Ricon Corporation 
Rides for Bay Area Commuters 
R. L. Banks & Associates, Inc 
Robin.son & Associates 
Rocky Mountain Institute 
Russell's Printing and Publishing 
Shearson Lehman Brothers 
Sierra Club 

Simon & Company, Inc 
Spina Bifida Association of America 
Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation 
The Stride Rile Corporation 
Summit Communications 

Transportation Communications Union, AFL-CIO 
Transport Workers Union, AFL-CIO 
Transportation Manufacturing Corporation 
Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO 
United Auto Workers, AFL-CIO 
United Cerebral Palsy Association.^, Inc. 
United Transportation Union, AFL-CIO 
United States Conference of Mayors 
Universal Coach Parts, Inc 
Urban Engineers 
Vapor Corporation 
Weslin Consulting Services, Inc 
Western Insurance Information Services 
Wisconsin Power and Light Company 
WR Lazard Laidlaw & Mead, Inc 



2442 

STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC TRANSIT ASSOCIATION 

INTRODUCTION 



Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, the American Public Transit 
Association (APIA) appreciates the opportunity to testify on the Transportation and 
Related Agencies Appropriations Act for FY 1994. 

We thank the members of this subcommittee for their support of the President's 
Economic Stimulus proposal, which would have provided an additional $752 million in 
much needed FY 1993 supplemental funding for transit. 

However, we now look to FY 1994 -- and beyond -- for increased federal investment in 
our network of local public transit providers. Spending on public transit service and 
facilities can build on the federal capital investment which has already been made in 
transit systems across the nation and produce a wealth of benefits. Transit can help to 
reduce congestion (saving people time), inaease mobility for all Americans (especially 
people with disabilities, the elderly, and the poor), create jobs, and help us compete 
internationally. For the sake of future generations we need to make our world more 
liveable by improving the air we breathe, conserving finite energy resources, and 
rebuilding our basic infrastructure. Quality transit can help achieve these goals by 
providing a real alternative to the energy consumption and pollution produced by single 
occupancy automobile use. 

We urge the Congress to take advantage of the opportunity for change which the new 
Administration has presented. The President's budget recommends a new set of priorities 
which includes increased investment in transit. Funding the transit program at the levels 
proposed by the President is the first step toward rebuilding our cities. Better 
maintenance of old rail systems and timely replacement of aging bus fleets will save 
money for txjth the federal government and transit authorities over the long run. 
Adequate, stable, and predictable funding of both the formula and major capital transit 
programs is essential to transit service across the nation. Inaeased funding for the 
transit formula program is badly needed after a 14% cut in the program in FY 1993. 

In addition to the recommendations included in the budget, we request that Congress 
consider increased funding for transit operating assistance. Transit agencies cannot 
purchase more buses and inaease rail service if they cannot afford to operate such 
services. Operating aid has remained flat or declined in every year since 1980. Beyond 
the erosion in purchasing power due to inflation, transit operators are now facing higher 
operating costs attributable to the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Clean Air Act, and 
federal requirements for drug and alcohol testing. If transit agencies are required to pay 
the proposed Btu tax, yet another operating cost -- fuel -- will increase by an estimated 
8% to 10%. The only way many transit agencies can afford to pay for these increased 
costs is by raising fares and reducing service. In many cases, these fare increases and 
service cuts are counterproductive because riders leave the system and revenues decline. 



APTA SUPPORTS PROPOSAL TO FUND TRANSIT AT $4.6 BILUON 



Although APTA advocates full funding of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency 
Act (ISTEA) in FY 1994, the transit industry was pleased that the President recommended 
transit funding of $4.6 billion in FY 1994. We are, however, concerned by the fact that the 
Administration budget exceeds the outlay limitations established in the 1990 Budget 
Enforcement Act. 



2443 



We urge the members of this subcommittee to maintain the priority which the President's 
budget proposal places on transit. Under the Administration proposal, transit would 
receive an increase of $803 million, or 21.1%, more than the 1993 appropriated level. We 
view this as a positive step toward full funding of the transit program authorized under the 
ISTEA. 

Within the transit program, the Administration requested a 43.2% increase in formula 
funding. The budget recommended an increase of $733.4 million in Section 9, 16(b), and 
18 formula funds, for a total formula program of $2,433.7 million in FY 1994. It also 
recommended adding $21.2 million in Section 8 planning to the formula program. 

We urge the Subcommittee to increase funding for these programs as recommended in 
the budget for a number of reasons. Because formula funding was reduced by more 
than 14% last year, an increase this year would help to pay for purchases and 
maintenance that had to be delayed, f^any medium and smaller sized areas rely almost 
exclusively on the federal formula program to meet system costs which are not met by 
fares or local funding, f^any of those operators who depend primarily on the formula 
program also felt that increases in the major capital program came at the expense of the 
formula program. In response to their concerns, APIA adopted a policy which supports 
the President's emphasis on increased formula funding and which calls for a distribution 
between formula funding and Section 3 capital funding that adheres to the ISTEA 
priorities. The APTA policy calls for $1.38 in Section 9 and 18 formula funding for every 
$1 in Section 3 capital funding, which is the ratio established in ISTEA at fully authorized 
levels. 

APTA also supports the proposed $46.6 million increase recommended for the Section 
3 major capital investment program in FY 1994. Clearly the demand for new rail starts 
and extensions, major bus purchases, and rail modernization far exceed funding available 
for such purposes. 



INCREASED FUNDING OF OPERATING ASSISTANCE IS ESSENTIAL 

Day-to-day maintenance and operations require a stable and reliable financial 
commitment. Full funding of the authorized operating limit would help to retain current 
jobs, support new jobs, and permit service expansion. Operating assistance in FY 1993 
is $226 million less than the authorized limit of $1,028 billion. Utilization of the authorized 
operating limit will not increase federal expenditures in the long run, but it will help to avert 
layoffs, pay for maintenance of vehicles, equipment, and trackage, and prevent reductions 
in bus and train service. Current formula apportionments for smaller urbanized areas in 
24 states do not even equal operating limitations for individual localities. Because all 
federal funds for rural transit operators can be used for operating, their operating aid was 
reduced by over 14% in FY 1993. 

Since Federal, State, and local governments have already made a huge capital investment 
in the transit infrastructure, it is important that we properly maintain those capital assets. 
These substantial assets include bus and rail rolling stock, rail trackage, signals, and 
related equipment, and garages and other maintenance equipment. If we are to make 
increased investment in facilities we must also have the funds to operate and maintain the 
additional buses and trains so the benefits of increased transit ridership can be realized. 

Maintenance and operation of the nation's transit systems costs some $16.8 billion per 
year, less than six percent of which now comes from the federal government. 
Operating these systems through 1997 will cost nearly $75 billion in current dollars. As 
transit systems offer both expanded and new services to meet new passenger demand, 
increased support for operations, as well as capital, will be required. 



2444 



The Transit Safety, Service, and Standards Fund 

APIA supports a recent proposal to dedicate increases in federal operating aid above the 
current level to costs associated with federal mandates under the Americans with 
Disabilities Act (ADA), the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA), and drug and 
alcohol testing requirements. The creation of a "Transit Safety, Service, and Standards 
Fund' is intended to make additional federal assistance available to help offset the new 
costs faced by all transit grant recipients. 

The "Safety" aspect of this proposal is designed to specifically address the new drug and 
alcohol testing requirements which are expected to cost transit operators between $20 
to $25 million per year. The "Service" aspect would be used to support the operational 
expenses required to implement new ADA service requirements, which are estimated to 
exceed $349 million annually, according to DOT. Lastly, the "Standards" aspect would 
address the operational needs for installing and maintaining the equipment required to 
meet the standards imposed by the Clean Air Act, estimated to cost over $100 million per 
year. 

APTA has long argued for increased operating assistance, to at least the authorized level. 
While additional operating aid has been needed for some time, the increased costs 
identified in this proposal further justify that need. We urge the subcommittee to consider 
including such a provision in the FY 1994 Transportation and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act to assist the transit industry in complying with these laws. 



FUNDING FOR ALL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS 
SHOULD ADHERE TO THE PRIORITIES ESTABUSHED IN ISTEA 



APTA supports equitable funding of all transit programs so our nation can reap the 
benefits of the carefully designed transit program authorized in the ISTEA. Equitable 
funding adheres to the priorities established in ISTEA, not only within the Federal Transit 
Administration (FTA) but for surface transportation programs as a whole. Until transit 
programs are full funded at ISTEA-authorized levels, there should be a fair and equitable 
balance between the formula programs (Section 9 and 18) and the Section 3 major capital 
investment program. 

To meet this equity test, funding should be consistent with the authorized program 
funding ratio of $1.36 in formula funding for every $1 in Section 3 funding. Whatever the 
total transit funding level provided in a given year, APTA advocates that each FTA 
program be funded in proportion with its authorized share of the fully authorized program. 

Funding for gH surface transportation modes should be increased in an equitable manner. 
Past inequities between highway and transit programs must be reversed so that the 
people of this nation have real transportation alternatives, and a balanced approach to 
meeting surface transportation needs. 



WHY SHOULD TRANSIT RECEIVE A FUNDING INCREASE? 

Full and equitable funding of the ISTEA transit program is essential if the transit industry 
is to reach its full potential to help solve many urgent national problems. 

Everyone benefits from increased transit ridership. People who choose transit gain when 
fares are stable and service is maintained or expanded. Those who don't use transit gain 
something too - they drive on less-congested highways and roads. Even more 
significant, however, is the cost savings to the Federal Government. If our highways are 



2445 



less congested we can avoid building new roads to accommodate increased traflic and 
the cost of maintaining our existing highway system is reduced. Everyone is better off 
when the air is cleaner and the economy is more productive. 

That's why we must try not to repeat the mistakes of the 1980s, a decade when transit 
fares increased by 32% in constant dollars. Those who are transit-dependent, including 
people with limited incomes, were hardest hit by these fare increases. The increases also 
limited transit's ability to attract new riders during the mid and late 1980s. Each 10% 
increase in fares translates into a 4% decline in ridership. In turn, that translates into 
lower average vehicle occupancy and more air pollution, wasted energy, and gridlock. 



The Cost of Federal Mandates 

Over the past several years, Congress has enacted several comprehensive pieces of 
legislation that are imposing great costs on the transit industry. Both the Americans with 
Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 impose mandates 
without providing the financing to carry them out. 

The transit industry supports these laws and the policies they represent because the ADA 
will increase mobility for all people with disabilities and the Clean Air Act Amendments will 
help reduce air pollution and conserve energy. However, full funding of the ISTEA is 
necessary to properly implement the mandates established in both of these laws. 

For example, in the provision of services to people with disabilities, there is a growing and 
alarming trend toward health and human service agencies discontinuing their 
transportation services for their clients and forcing local public transit systems, who must 
provide such service under the ADA, to pick up the costs. This practice places a 
tremendous financial burden on already strapped transit agencies. 

The U.S. Department of Transportation estimates the national, annual cost to comply with 
the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) ranges from $676 million to $938 million in 1990 
dollars. The costs covers lifts on buses, making key rail stations, transit centers and rail 
cars accessible as well as developing paratransit systems. 

The Clean Air Act of 1990 requires reduced vehicle emissions. The annual cost to install 
exhaust cleaners and upgraded fuel is $110 million. One nationwide survey of transit 
systems found that installation of particulate traps on the U.S. bus fleet would cost an 
estimated $522 million. 

We are hopeful that Congress and the new Administration recognize the value of helping 
the industry v^h the costs of federally mandated operating and capital increases resulting 
from federal mandates. If transit operators are forced to raise fares and reduce service 
to pay for federal mandates, there will be a corresponding reduction in transit ridership. 
This will undercut transit's ability to fulfill its role in achieving national goals related to the 
environment, congestion, mobility, energy conservation, and the economy. For every 
10% increase in fares there is a 4% reduction in ridership. 

Transit Industry Manufacturers: American Industry On the Brink of Extinction 

Transit systems are not the only members of the transit industry that are affected by 
inadequate investment in the transit infrastructure. This is a critical time for the supply 
side of the transit industry. Equipment purchases are at an all time low and have been 
estimated to be less than half of what they were several years ago. Most transit industry 
suppliers are operating in a cutback or layoff mode. Some are presently so weakened 
from the recession, that if there is not an increase in the purchase of equipment, goods, 
and services, business failures will result. 



2446 



According to a survey conducted by the supply side of the transit industry, about one-half 
of this group's business is transit related. But, this trend is down, and people are exiting 
the transit industry due to unpredictable funding and procurement process. An estimated 
one-half of all suppliers have fewer than 25 employees. Small businesses are one of the 
areas with the highest percentage in new job creation. An increase in federal funding for 
transit will translate into new job creation and will help lift our economy. 

We have a strong national interest in maintaining the economic health of our transit supply 
industry. Reduced transit funding - both capital and operating - threatens the stability 
and viability of our suppliers and their ability to provide the goods and services needed 
by the industry to provide transit service. We need a strong transit manufacturing 
industry to meet the growing needs of transit operators over the long run. A healthy 
transit manufacturing sector can generate badly needed jobs and help strengthen the 
economy. 



Transit Creates Jobs: Every one million dollars invested in transit creates or maintains 
fifty-eight direct and indirect jobs. Investment in operations and maintenance are 
especially productive, resulting in sixty-eight jobs per one million dollars expended. 
Transit also provides essential transportation for other workers. 



Transit Provides Mobliity: For people with disabilities, older Americans, the young, and 
the poor, access to transit can be the single most important factor in the quality of their 
lives and their ability to work, obtain education, and gain access to essential services. 



Transit Reduces Pollution: Travel by transit results in less pollution than similar travel 
by automobile. One person who takes transit to work instead of driving alone reduces 
pollution by 9 pounds of hydrocarbons, 62 pounds of carbon monoxide, and 5 pounds 
of nitrogen oxides. 

Transit Conserves Energy: Travel by transit requires less energy use than travel by 
automobile. A typical commuter who switches from driving alone to taking transit saves 
200 gallons of gasoline per year. 



Transit Stimulates the Economy: Investment in transit infrastructure is a highly 
productive public works investment. A recent study by economist David Alan Aschauer 
has shown that transportation spending is an important determinate of work force 
productivity and that investment in transit spending has over twice the potential to impact 
productivity as does highway spending. 



Transit Reduces Traffic Congestion: Transit helps reduce traffic congestion by moving 
people, not vehicles. Every bus full of passengers at rush hour removes 40 cars from 
traffic, every full rail car removes 75-125 cars from traffic, and every van full of passengers 
removes 13 cars from traffic. 



TRANSIT HAS HAD MORE THAN ITS SHARE OF FUNDING CUTS 



Federal funding for transit declined by 48% in real terms during the last twelve years. The 
loss of federal funding has been accommodated by service cuts, fare increases, and 
greater tax burdens at the state and local level. Continuing to replace federal operating 



2447 



assistance has become more difficult for city, county, and state governments because of 
cuts in other federal and state programs. 

Not surprisingly, the cuts in transit funding have meant only modest ridership gains in the 
1980's. Replacing lost federal assistance by raising fares makes it almoot impossible to 
achieve national goals. National goals to reduce energy use, pollution, and congestion 
call for increased transit ridership. 

In 1981, transit received 20% of all U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) budget 
authority. By 1991, transit's share of DOT budget authority had dropped to less than 
1 1%, about half of what it was a decade earlier. Federal assistance also meets a smaller 
percentage of transit capital needs than it did ten years ago. In 1981, federal assistance 
represented 78% of transit capital spending in urbanized areas; by 1989 the federal share 
had dropped to 60.5% in 1990. 

In 1981 , federal assistance was 16.8% of all transit operating revenue; by 1990 the federal 
share had dropped to under 5.6% in 1991. Federal operating assistance limits for 
urbanized areas declined by 57% in constant dollars between 1980 and 1992. In contrast, 
between 1980 and 1990, fares increased by 32% in constant dollars and state and local 
operating aid increased by 69% in real terms. 

In 1981, highway programs received two dollars in federal funds for every federal transit 
dollar. In 1991, highways received four and one-half dollars in federal funds for every 
transit dollar. Since 1981, federal funding for highways increased 102% while funding for 
transit declined by 18%. The decrease of transit funding by 18% does not fully show how 
much federal funding for transit has plummeted. The actual purchasing power of federal 
transit funds is slightly over one-half the level of twelve years ago if inflation is considered. 



CONCLUSION 



Thank you for providing APTA with this opportunity to express our views on federal transit 
funding in FY 1994. 

APTA maintains that all modes of transportation are an integral part of the whole 
transportation "network" and encourages the Subcommittee to invest adequately in all 
modes. The ISTEA attempted to reverse past inequities in transportation investment and 
President Clinton's recent budget proposal also attempted to correct modal funding 
biases. This Subcommittee has the power to increase transit funding, and in doing so, 
to improve the nation's overall transportation system. 

APTA looks to this Subcommittee to bring transit funding to an equitable level with other 
surface transportation programs. Never has the case for increased funding been as 
strong as it is this year. As we move toward the year 2000, there can be no doubt that 
transit needs to be a fundamental part of our national policy on competitiveness, energy 
conservation, the environment, mobility, productivity, and economic development. 



2448 



AMERICAN TRUCKING ASSOCIATIONS, INC. 

STATEMENT OF THOMAS J. DONOHUE, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF 

EXECUTIVE OFHCER 

I. INTRODUCTION 

The American Trucking Associations appreciates the opportunity to 
comment on the Fiscal Year 1994 budgets of the Department of Transportation 
and the Interstate Commerce Commission as they relate to motor carriers. 



A. ATA Represents the Trucking Industry 

The American Trucking Associations (ATA) is the national trade association 
of the trucking industry. ATA's membership includes more than 4,000 carriers and 
suppliers of all sizes and types. ATA is the national federation of the trucking 
industry with affiliated associations in every state, and the District of Columbia, 
and 10 national affiliates. In aggregate, ATA represents every type and class of 
motor carrier in the country and, with federation membership, we represent over 
30,000 trucking companies. 



B. The Trucking Industry Delivers America 

Trucking is the nation's largest freight transportation mode. The trucking 
industry employs 7.6 million people-- more than the populations of 42 of the 50 
United States. We have gross freight revenues equal to 5% of the gross domestic 
product" a total of $278 billion per year. Trucks haul 77% of all manufactured 
goods and transport 42% of the total tonnage shipped by all modes - 2.7 billion 
tons of freight annually. 



C. Safety is Our Driving Concern 

The trucking industry has been a strong supporter of efforts to improve 
highway safety, such as the Commercial Drivers License and drug testing of 
drivers. We have fully supported- and we appreciate- efforts of this Committee 
to fund safety initiatives, such as the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program, 
which pays for state inspectors. We also fully support your funding of research 
efforts to get to the root causes of highway safety issues. 

While we need to do more, we are proud that for the ten year period ending 
in 1991, the fatal accident rate for commercial trucks was down 40%, even 
though travel actually increased by 38.7%. In 1991, more people died from falling 
in their own home than died in accidents involving commercial trucks. 



D. We Pay Our Fair Share of Taxes 

In addition to paying income and payroll taxes, like other businesses, 
trucking companies pay a huge amount of user fees to build and maintain our 
highway system. In 1991, commercial trucks made up only 8% of all registered 
vehicles, yet paid $19.6 billion in federal and state highway taxes. This is 37% of 
the total taxes paid by all motor vehicles. In 1991, commercial trucks paid more 
than half of the money received by the Federal Highway Trust Fund. 



2449 



E. Why We Care About the Appropriations Process 

This Committee is in a position to ensure that funds are used to improve 
productivity and safety by guaranteeing that US DOT and the ICC malte wise 
investments when it comes to spending money, changing regulations, doing 
research and managing programs. This Committee must ensure a level playing 
field across the various transportation modes and that one mode is not subsidizing 
another. 



II. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

A. Federal Highway Administration 

. 1 . We Support the FHWA 's Major Programs Levels 

ATA believes that the Administration has been responsive to the needs of 
highway safety and productivity by proposing spending levels for major FHWA 
programs at or near ISTEA authorization levels for FY 1994. 

Specifically, the 1994 program level estimates for the National Highway 
System is $3.56 billion, the Surface Transportation Program is $4.05 billion, the 
Bridge Program is $2.73 billion, and motor carrier safety grants are $65 million. 

We strongly urge this Committee to maintain these levels as you review 
competing priorities. 

2. More Spending Needed on Driver/Vehicle/Highway System Research 

In 1994, the Department of Transportation is proposing to spend only $8.85 
million on truck-related research. While this is more than last year, it is too small 
to meet the nation's needs to improve safety and productivity. 

Considering first, that in 1994 the Federal Railroad Administration proposes 
to spend $18 million on basic railroad research and $135 million on high-speed rail 
development, and second, that railroads transport freight that is worth merely 1 1% 
of the value of freight transported by truck, it is clear that freight transportation 
research priorities need to be adjusted. 

The following truck-related research projects regarding the system of the 
driver, the vehicle and the highway are essential: 

• Driver Research. Congress has been supportive of FHWA efforts to 
gain a greater understanding of the various factors that contribute to 
safe truck driver performance. The Committee should build on current 
research efforts by investing in projects that offer high potential 
safety breakthroughs. These projects include development of 
continual fitness-for-duty monitors for truck drivers and basic research 
on the relationship between loading and unloading freight and driver 
fatigue. 

* Vehicle Research. Significant vehicle safety benefits are likely to be 
found in increasing numbers of vehicle inspections and in 
demonstrations of improved vehicle safety technology. Inspection 
costs can be decreased and inspector productivity improved through 
automated inspection procedures. Demonstration of improved 



2450 



technology - such as brake-by-wire - will speed the introduction of 
new technology into fleets. 

Highway Research. The Long Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) 
program, now under the supervision of the FHWA, is a 20 year 
research program that will develop better methods of pavement 
design and highway construction. We urge the Committee to 
continue to support this vital research effort. 

The Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP) is complete after a 
five year, $150 million effort. Implementation of SHRP research is 
critical. We urge this Committee to support FHWA's efforts to help 
implement the many products developed from the research through 
appropriate funding support. 



improved Data . The Center for National Truck Statistics at the 
University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute compiles 
federal and state data into the single best statistical source of all fatal 
accidents involving large trucks (TIFA - Trucks Involved in Fatal 
Accident). A 50-50 distribution of private and public funding normally 
supports this survey. FHWA plans to carry on its funding of TIFA in 
FY 94, but a contribution of $75,000 from NHTSA is needed to 
assure continuation of data flow. 



3. More Money Needed for Truck Safety Education 

FHWA needs to help small companies in the motor carrier industry comply 
with new safety and hazardous material regulations. Recently, there have been 
extensive changes in driver qualifications, vehicle inspection, and hazardous 
materials regulations. It is not enough for FHWA to publish the rules and then 
have its next contact with the motor carrier be an audit that results in fines. 

We urge the Committee to provide funding and direct FHWA to work with 
industry to provide free town meetings on safety compliance for smaller carriers. 
Overview material, reference matter and "how to" compliance publications should 
be provided before a person attends the town meeting to ensure the most 
productive exchange. 



4. Comprehensive Strategy Needed for IVHS 

FHWA is requesting $101 million for research and development of intelligent 
vehicle/highway systems (IVHS). An additional $113 million is available from the 
Federal-aid Highways Program. 

We are concerned that FHWA funding for IVHS Commercial Vehicle 
Operations (IVHS-CVO) may be getting well ahead of the technological, 
institutional and legal constraints involved in developing practical IVHS solutions 
which will benefit carriers, shippers, government agencies and the general public. 

FHWA recently submitted a draft general plan for CVO Services to the IVHS 
America CVO Committee for review and comm.?nt. The plan calls for developing 
and deploying over the next five years, a nationwide system for automatic 
(electronic) verification of truck safety, including driver monitoring, electronic 
credential monitoring and compliance, electronic size and weight verification at 



2451 



highway speeds, electronic placarding of hazardous materials, pre-clearance for 
cross boarder trucking and improved fleet management for carriers. 

Substantial FHWA research funding has been provided for electronic 
credential monitoring over the past eight years. Yet today, as the multi-state 
Heavy Vehicle Electronic License Plate (HELP) research project is drawing to a 
close, no clear data or practical benefit information has been developed to provide 
the kind of free flow truck travel and electronic tax collection proposed in the 
FHWA plan. 

FHWA needs to lay out a multi-year program of research focused on 
development and testing of IVHS technologies with near-term payoffs (in terms of 
reductions in traffic congestion and related air pollution and improvements in 
highway safety) and promise for market acceptance. No additional systems should 
be deployed until FHWA has set standards for compatibility of systems and until 
FHWA has completed its study of state and local institutional barriers to IVHS 
implementation. 



B. Research and Special Programs Administration 

We Support RSPA 's Proposal 

The President's budget proposes a program level of $59 million. We believe 
that this level of funding is fully warranted because RSPA has a number of 
important new regulatory responsibilities under recently enacted statutes. 

Included in the budget level is $12.6 million dollars for hazardous materials 
safety. RSPA is also proposing to continue its industry and government program 
of Cooperative Hazardous Materials Enforcement Development. We strongly 
support both of these programs because they improve the safe transportation of 
hazardous materials. 



C. Federal Railroad Administration 

1. Improve Railroad Safety Through Higher User Fees 

We support all transportation modes paying all the costs of safety 
regulation. This is what happens in the highway safety arena. FRA has the legal 
authority to recover all of its safety costs from the rail industry, but has chosen not 
to recover the costs of administrative and policy support for safety activities that 
are included under the Office of the Administrator. 

We urge the Committee to require this additional cost recovery to free-up 
funds for other priorities of the Committee. 

2. We Oppose Federal Subsidies for Amtrak, Including Dedicating a Gas 
Tax Penny 

The Administration proposes to make $633 million available from the 
General Fund for Amtrak including $165 million for capital costs. In recent years, 
Amtrak has always received more in the Appropriations Bill than the Administration 
requested. We urge the Committee to consider carefully the appropriate funding 
level for AMTRAK, given the severe constraints of the Budget Resolution. 



2452 



Amtrak is also seeking legislation that would dedicate a penny of the federal 
fuels tax for its exclusive use. To the extent that the Federal government provides 
any funds for Amtrak, those funds should come from the General Fund and be 
subject to the normal appropriations process. Requiring highway users to directly 
subsidize rails makes as little sense from an equity standpoint as having highway 
users subsidize airline travel. 

3. \Ne Oppose Double Funding of Operation Lifesaver 

Under the Railroad Research and Development account, FRA proposes to 
provide funds to the Operation Lifesaver program (the railroad's program to reduce 
their liability in grade crossing accidents). The Committee should be aware that 
FHWA is required under 23 U.S.C. 104(d) to spend $300,000 of Highway Trust 
Fund money each year on Operation Lifesaver because of the amendments made 
by ISTEA. Funding this program from two accounts is unnecessary. 

Grade-crossing safety improvements should be required to compete for 
funding in the same manner as all other highway and intermodal safety projects. 

4. We Oppose Funding the High-Speed Ground Transportation Program 
From The Highway Trust Fund. 

The proposed funding level for the FRA High-Speed Ground Transportation 
Program is a 2800% increase over 1993 (from $5 million to $140 million). Fully 
75% of these funds are planned to be diverted from the Highway Trust Fund 
($105 million). We do not believe that technology has improved so dramatically 
over the last year to justify this magnitude of increased funding level. 

We especially oppose the use of Highway Trust Funds for this purpose. It is 
a clear diversion of a critical resource needed for preserving the highways and 
bridges of this nation and amounts to one mode cross-subsidizing another mode. 

We strongly urge the Committee to reduce the proposed funding levels and 
ensure funds are provided the appropriate sources. 



D. Federal Transit Administration 

We Urge a Level Playing Field For Transfer 

ISTEA provides that federal transit funds can be transferred for highway 
purposes only if the matching funds that are used for the eventual highway project 
were eligible to be used for transit projects. There is no such requirement on the 
transfer of highway funds. 

We urge the Committee to enact a general provision that deletes this 
requirement and creates a level playing field for transfers. 

E. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

1 . We Support NHTSA 's Research and Methods 

NHTSA conducts joint research efforts with the private sector through 
organizations soch as the Society of Automotive Engineers. Such cooperative 
work helps focus joint funding on an issue and enables all involved to learn 
together about the project and the testing results. ATA is involved with such 



2453 



NHTSA projects in the important areas of truck crashworthiness and the 
development of methods to test truck tires. 

NHTSA also conducts tests of vehicle systems in fleets to determine how 
concepts such as antilock braking endure in actual service. Again, we support 
such work. As we gain more experience in such programs, we are learning that 
they must be long term (at least five years) in order to truly reflect how new 
systems will function in the "real world." 



2. More Emphasis is Needed to Establish Baselines for Maintainability, 
Durability, and Reliability. 

NHTSA must focus on the ability to maintain the components that are 
required by its regulations. In the hostile environment in which trucks operate, a 
regulation that imposes difficult maintenance procedures will create new problems. 
NHTSA needs to promote: indicators on components to highlight maintenance 
problems; identification systems on parts to ensure that the replacement part is the 
right one and replacement is done at the right time; and easy access so that parts 
can be inspected. 

NHTSA must promote standards to ensure that components that are 
required by its regulations are durable. For example, the Environmental Protection 
Agency's regulations on emissions from new engine exhausts include a durability 
factor. Each manufacturer is required to certify that, with the maintenance 
specified, its engine will meet the standards for 290,000 miles. NHTSA must 
begin to adopt a similar approach for its rules. 

Durable components alone are not enough. Something that lasts 290,000 
miles is unacceptable if it has to be serviced frequently. Therefore, reliability is 
also an important factor. 

To define durability and reliability, NHTSA needs to study factors such as 
total vehicle life, yearly use, and the type of service provided. A truck that lasts 
five years does not need wheels that last 50 years. Also, 100,000 miles of 
highway service is vastly different from 40,000 miles of on/off road use. 

NHTSA must give emphasis to maintainability, durability and reliability or 
new complex safety systems simply will not be successful in the nation's truck 
fleets. 

By legislation, the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) are 
issued by NHTSA and apply to the manufacturers and their new products. They 
define, as a minimum, how good a part or system must be when it is new. 

Also by legislation, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR) 
are issued by the FHWA, Office of Motor Carriers (FHWA/OMC) and apply to motor 
carriers and the vehicles they use in interstate commerce. 

The relationship between the rules just noted should be as follows: The 
FMVSS is a ceiling defining how good a device is when new and how long it 
should retain its new attributes, while the FMCSR is a floor, establishing the 
threshold of conditions requiring repair. Because such a relationship does not 
currently exist, we recommend that the FHWA/OMC and NHTSA be required to 
work together to write both the FMCSRs and FMVSS. In the future these rules 
should be coordinated according to the floor/ceiling concept and, as already noted, 
the FMVSS should also address durability, reliability and maintainability. 



2454 

F. Bureau of Transportation Statistics 

Funding Should Come From All Modes 

The ISTEA established a Bureau of Transportation Statistics and funded it 
solely with funds from the Highway Trust Fund. Since the Bureau is responsible 
for gathering statistics on all modes of transportation, we urge the Committee to 
ensure all modes contribute to its funding effort through appropriate Trust Fund 
contributions. 

G. Intermodalism 

1 . The National Commission on Intermodal Transportation 

A key part of the ISTEA legislation is "I" of intermodalism. Congress can 
renew its commitment to this part of the act by funding the National Commission 
on Intermodal Transportation. This eleven member group, of which ATA is a part, 
will make an important contribution to fostering the spirit of ISTEA though its 
investigation of the domestic and international aspects of intermodal transportation 
and by recommending policies to help the Nation achieve an efficient intermodal 
transportation system. At this point all eleven members have been appointed. 
There is some discussion about expanding the Commission to allow the current 
Administration to make appointments. 

We support that effort as well as the need to extend the statutory deadline 
for the Commission's report to Congress and to provide funding to the 
Commission's efforts. 

2. Conduct a study of detention 

Congestion is a tax on motor carrier efficiency. This is particularly true of 
the effect of congestion on intermodal efficiency. The very nature of intermodal 
transportation requires smooth and efficient transfer of containers between the 
various means of transportation. Drayage carriers are key to this effort. 

The Transportation Research Board released a report earlier this year on bulk 
cargo ports. The report concludes that the efficiency of the U.S. intermodal 
transportation system could be threatened by bottlenecks in the system serving 
ports. Further, for many seaports, the weakest link in the logistics chain is at their 
"back door," where road linkages to marine terminals cause delays and increases in 
cost. Half of all ports and nearly two-thirds of general cargo ports face growing 
congestion on major truck routes. Such congestion increases transportation costs 
and vehicle emissions that degrade air quality. 

The linkage between congestion, trucks and ports was recognized by the 
Federal Maritime Commission when it promulgated CFR part 530, Truck Detention 
at Port of New York. Part 530 was put into effect by the Federal Maritime 
Commission to establish a system to reduce truck congestion at the Port of New 
York, with disputes concerning claims for penalties to be settled by an adjudicator 
selected by the Commission. 

On February 17, 1993, the Commission ruled that current conditions at the 
Port of New York may no longer warrant these provisions and suspended the rule. 

ATA and the ATA Intermodal Council believe that the Transportation 
Research Board findings are correct and that congestion is a serious problem at our 
Nation's ports. Further, we believe that detention rules are one strategy for 



2455 



mitigating the economic consequences of congestion. We therefore ask the 
Committee to appropriate funds for the Office of Intermodalism to conduct a study 
of the issues surrounding the Federal Maritime Commission decision to suspend 
detention. We would hope that both the study would be done promptly and that 
the Federal Maritime Commission would act after the study is complete. We also 
believe that conducting such a study will further the development of the Office of 
Intermodalism by engaging it in this critical issue. 

III. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION 

Provide Adequate Staffing and Funding Levels 

As long as the agency continues to exist, it must be given sufficient staffing 
to perform both its statutory and administrative functions. These include insurance 
filing, investigations of illegal broker operations, handling of name changes, 
maintenance of the ICC's weekly fuel index, carrier reporting requirements (relied 
on by Congress as well as the banking, insurance and other industries to judge 
how well the trucking industry is doing), and disposition of proceedings before it. 

Until a legislative solution to the undercharge crisis has been enacted by 
Congress, the ICC can expect an ever increasing number of shipper petitions 
seeking resolution of unreasonable rate complaints against bankrupt carriers. The 
Commission must have the staff and other resources to handle these complaints in 
a timely manner. 

Further, Congress should provide the ICC sufficient funding to modernize it 
tariff filing system. For the immediate future, that means sufficient funding to 
perform imaging of existing tariffs. We understand this transfer would require at 
least $750,000 in funding. In the long run, it means providing the agency with 
funding to implement an Electronic Tariff filing System. 

ATA asks that the Committee look into this matter closely and make a 
determination to provide the Commission the staff and other resources it needs to 
continue to perform its many remaining functions. 

IV. CONCLUSION 

ATA urges Congress to provide the Department of Transportation and the 
Interstate Commerce Commission with appropriations adequate to enable them to 
fulfill their mandated responsibilities in an efficient, reasonable and expeditious 
manner. 

FHWA must promote better highway research programs. Highway 
operations need to be safer and highways must be built and designed better. A 
comprehensive strategy is needed for IVHS. Safety promotion must receive 
greater emphasis. 

• We support the RSPA program as proposed, but believe that there are 
significant opportunities to save money in the FRA program. We are 
very concerned about the potential diversion of highway money to 
high-speed rail programs. We are concerned about the lack of a level 
playing field in the federal transit program. NHTSA needs to give 
more attention to the maintainability, durability and reliability of the 
components and systems it requires. We urge full funding of the 
Bureau of Statistics, with all modes sharing in the cost. 

Thank you for the opportunity to provide our comments. 



2456 



STATEME^^^ of the AMERICAN ASSCXTIATION OF AIRPORT 
EXECUTIVES AND THE AIRPORTS COUNCIL INTERNATIONAL- 
NORTH AMERICA 

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee: 

We appreciate Ihis opportunity to present the views of the airport operators and executives across the country 
regarding fiscal year 1994 funding for programs of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 

As members of this subcommittee know, the members we represent are the local, state and regional governmental 
bodies, and the men and women who manage and operate our nation's airports. 

From the earliest days of aviation, local governments have had the primary responsibility for developing, operating 
and fmancing our country's commercial airports. Today, the air transportation system is the linchpin of our national 
and local economies, essential to the safe transportation of people and goods, both domestically and internationally. 

Airports support local economic development by providing complete transportation services, stimulating business 
activity and investment and creating jobs. Airports must generate revenue for their particular operations to be self- 
sufTicient, usually without the general tax revenues enjoyed by other public enterprises. They must operate like cities 
within cities, providing their own police and fire protection and their own public works. Airports must perform all of 
these services efficiently, unobtrusively and with as little impact on the environment as possible. 

Since deregulation, the number of passengers using the domestic aviation system has exploded. As a result of the 
vast increases in passengers, 23 airports currently suffer 20,000 hours of delay or more per year. If nothing further is 
done to increase system capacity, the FAA forecasts that the number of airports with 20,000 hours or more of delay 
per year will inaease to 36 in less than 10 yeare — a daunting increase. This results in billions of dollars per year of 
delay costs and lost productivity throughout the system. 

Airport and airspace delays increased in 1992 by 4 percent over 1991 delays, according to ATA. According to the 
FAA, domestic passenger enplanements increased by 3.7 percent in fiscal year 1992 and are forecast to increase by 
1.8 percent in 1993, 5 percent in 1994, 4.5 percent in 1995 and an average of 3-5 percent over a 12-year period. 

The current financial condition of U.S. carriers is cause for concern throughout the industry, including the airport 
community. The symbiotic relationship between airports and airlines is clear. Neither can exist without the other. 

The aiiport community is sensitive to the challenges faced by the industry and cognizant of the need to work to- 
gether in the months ahead to build a stronger industry. A number of airline officials and analysts believe that the 
best prescription for a return to financial health in the industry is a recovering economy. 

As the economy recovers, more and more people will be using the system. This growth in demand will place 
tremendous strain on the existing airspace and airport system, and require renewed focus on the requirement to 
expand system capacity and the R&D to help aeate it. Despite the temporary lull in air travel demand in the United 
States, growth will resume. Even if the growth is modest, work to increase effective capacity is fully justifiable in the 
light of the score of airports already burdened with serious delays and delay cost. 

The inevitably lengthy development and implementation tasks to provide new airport and airspace capacity justifies 
vigorous effort now to ameliorate the already very serious capacity shortfall and high delay costs at major airports. 

There is no doubt that the shortcomings of our technical infrastructure and the inefficiencies of the ATC system are 
costly to the users of the system. They create major costs due to aircraft delays and inadequate capacity. Equally 
important, these inefficiencies hurt the economic competitiveness of the United States. These technical issues are 
discussed more fully later in the testimony. 

We believe the federal government and local and state government airport operators have the responsibility to look 
long-term, to plan, finance and build not only the airport and aviation facilities needed today, but also those which 
will be needed in the near and long-term. This is not the same thing, however, as a "build it and they will come" 
mentality. It is not surprising that airline management — especially given their current predicament — look to the 
short-term, the next quarter, or in the case of some carriers in bankruptcy, week-to-week. They are seeking a 
"quick-fix" that might be elusive. When the economy improves and air traffic improves, we must make sure we 
have anticipated the demand and built sufficient facilities and capacity to meet it. Some of the same airlines 
accusing airports of having a field of dreams mentality are the ones, who, several years ago, were before this 
subcommittee complaining about inadequate airport capacity in the system. 



2457 



INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT 

It generally takes 3-7 yeare to undertake and complete an airport development project. The extensive master 
planning process, environmental approvals, long-term financing and other actions that must be accomplished 
make it extremely difiicult — and certainly not cost-effective — to disrupt or delay projects that are underway. We 
cannot afford to be shortsighted. That is what got us into the position we find ourselves in today with inadequate 
airport capacity and facilities. Since deregulation, we as a nation failed to provide adequate funding and means to 
expand capacity as necessary to keep pace with rapid growth in aviation that was experienced in those years. We 
are still catching up even now, despite the recent slow growth. But one thing we should have learned by now is 
that the aviation business is cyclical, and we can fully expect that when the economy improves (as it has in recent 
months) air travel demand will take off again. We will have doomed our air transportation system to perpetual 
inadequacy, inefficiency and unproGtability if we do not continue to build and expand now for the needs of 
tomorrow. 

Last year, we updated our airport capital development needs survey and found that capital development needs in 
the system approximated $10 billion a year over the next five years. It is important to note that this is a needs 
survey, not a wish-list of pie-in-the-sky airport directors' dreams. These are needed projects. They are real and 
have real benefit. The FAA has reviewed the survey and endorsed its results. Of the projects identified in the 
survey, approximately 60 percent, or $6 billion annually were AIP eligible projects. The federal government, with 
its limited resources and competing priorities has funded the AIP program at less than S2 billion a year. Three 
years ago, the Congress passed legislation that authorized airports to raise capital development funds directly from 
the air passengers by imposing modest passenger facility charges (PFCs) on travelers using the airport. This was 
done to help bridge the gap between aimual airport capital development funding needs and the inadequate funding 
level provided by the federal government. 

PFCs are critical to provide airports with the financing tools and greater independence to respond to the air traffic 
and expansion needs of the airlines and the air service needs of travelers and the oommuruties they serve. PFCs are 
building worthwhile projects, creating jobs and stimulating business opportunities for the airlines and many other 
airport-related businesses. Without PFCs, many of these projects would go unfunded or would be significantly 
delayed; the long-term capacity improvements and benefits they would provide would not be available now when 
the nation's economy needs it. 

When there is disagreement from the carriers over specific airport PFC projects (as there has been in approxi- 
mately one-fifth of the proposals) it is usually over terminal and access projects. Although the airlines may not 
perceive these types of projects to be of direct benefit to them, these projects are important and beneficial to air 
travelers. Airport operators must provide facilities that are safe, efficient and in compliance with federal mandates, 
in addition to getting passengers to, through and from their airports. Passengers pay federal ticket taxes and PFCs 
to contribute to the development and improvement of airport facilities that benefit them throughout their entire 
travel experience, not just those facilities that are used by the airlines. 

Airport operators and airlines will not always agree on the need for, or the scope or timing of a particular airport 
development project or program. Often, the individual tenant airlines at an airport will not agree among them- 
selves about development priorities. This is understandable, since they are competitors and each has its individual 
corporate strategies and preferences. 

This is precisely why AIP and PFCs are valuable. Airport operators are the public bodies entrusted with developing 
the infrastructure serving all elements of the air transportation system. AIP grants and PFC programs enable them to 
proceed with needed development without first obtaining approvals from competing and diverse airiine companies. 

PFCs must be preserved if airport development in the interests of the traveling public and the overall transportation 
system, rather than of a particular airiine or group of airlines, is to be met. Investment in airport development fosters 
not only a competitive, efficient and growing air transportation system. It also contributes to economic reviialization 
and growth throughout the country. Airport development aeates jobs, and spins off broader economic benefits in the 
localities and regions served by the airport. For each $1 billion invested in airport development, approximately 
40,(XK) to 50,000 jobs are created and sustained with related multiplier spending and tax revenue benefits for local 
and state governments, as well as the federal government. 

It is important to remember that compared to the $10 billion in annual development funding needs, the primary 
airport funding sources ($1.8 billion in AIP grants, an annual average of $3J billion in airport bonds and an esti- 
mated $471 million in PFC revenues in FY 1993) fall far short of the level of funding that is actually required. 
Despite the efforts of this subcommittee, we are still underfunding our airport infrastructure needs in tiiis country by 
at least 40 percent. 

With the focus on federal deficit reduction and economic revitalization, ways must be found to create jobs, ensure a 
sound general economic recovery and foster a healthy and growing transportation system. Investment in our nation's 



2458 



airports, through user-funded capital development programs, will return enormous dividends to citizens, travelers 
and shippers, as well as to airlines and others in the business of air transportation. 

AIP FUNDING 

Mr. Chairman, airports greatly appreciate your efforts to increase AIP funding over the past several years. The 
introduction of your START-UP legislation is a clear signal of your commitment to meet the funding needs of the 
entire transportation infrastructure system in this country, including airports. We in the airport community wish your 
views on the need for supplemental infrastructure spending could have prevailed with the majority of your col- 
leagues in the Congress. 

Since it now appears that supplemental AIP funds will not be available in the near term, the need for higher AIP 
funding levels as part of the regular appropriations process becomes even greater. The needs in the system are clearly 
identined. We recognize the challenge you face in attempting to fund a variety of transportation programs v^rith the 
limited dollars available to you. It is for that reason that airports respectfully request that you fund the Airport 
Improvement Program at a level of $2.2 billion for flscal year 1994. This is much lower than our actual needs and a 
far cry from the $3.7 billion in AIP that would have been available to airports if your proposed supplemental appro- 
priations bill had been adopted. 

By limiting our request to $2.2 billion for FY 1994, airports are attempting to be realistic, given the significant Fiscal 
constraints imposed by the current budgetary climate. By fully funding the AIP program at the $2.2 billion level, you 
would help aeate and sustain lens of thousands of jobs in every state in the nation, as well as prepare our transporta- 
tion infrastructure system for the 21st century. To that end, airports request that the AIP funding level be increased to 
$2.2 billion a year, beginning in fiscal year 1994, along with S percent annual inaeases. 



PFC PROGRAM 

As noted earlier In our testimony, the PFC program will provide a significant source of capital to help build the 
nation's airport infraslruclure for the 21st century. As of May 12, there were 98 PFC applications thai had been 
approved by FAA, with 51 applications under review. Revenue collection began last June and for 1992, airports 
received $1 16 million. The FAA estimates that figure will grow in 1993 to $471 million. 

Mr. Chairman, these fiinds will be used on projects that will improve safely, security and capacity throughout the 
system, reduce aircraft noise and provide additional opportunities for improved airline competition and service. 

We have worked with the airlines and the FAA to improve the consultation process; and we believe the process is 
working. There are meaningful discussions and airports are modifying their applications and/or the FAA is scrutinizing 
and disapproving or deferring projects. Of the 98 PFC applications approved by May 12, the total revenue associated 
with those projects over the various collection lengths is $6.4 billion. This compares to the original requests totaling 
$14.6 billion in those applications. When legislation creating the PFC program was adopted in 1990, the estimated 
annual revenue to airports from the program was estimated at $1 billion a year. In 1992, airports received $116 million 
and the FAA estimates this figure will increase to $471 million in 1993, still far short of the original estimates. 

AIRPORT COSTS 

Before moving into a discussion of other funding programs of the FAA, we would like to address an area of concern 
that airlines have raised recently — airport costs. 

Airlines contend that airport costs are one of the fastest-growing components of their cost structure. The fact of the 
matter is that airport operating expenses per total passengers (enplaned and deplaned) have increased very little during 
the period from 1990 to 1992. For example, operating expenses per total passengers at large hubs increased only 2.6 
percent between 1990 and 1992. This is an increase of 1.3 percent per year. On the whole, large hub, medium hub, 
small hub, non-hub and general aviation airport expenses have inaeased 1.8 percent over the past two years or less 
than 1 percent per year. 

Il is important to remember that airport costs are driven by passengers. The fare wars of last year brought record 
numbers of passengers through the system. This places a burden on the facility. While an air carrier certainly knows 
the difference in its bottom line between a full-fare traveler and a discount traveler, an airport can't differentiate. Both 
put the same burden on the facility. 

Another factor that greatly affects airport costs is federally mandated programs. Federal regulations and requirements 
regarding aviation security, environmental mitigation, compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, de-icing, 
and aviation safety all contribute to the cost of operating a facility. The goals behind these programs are worthwhile, 
but there must be a recognition that they place a fmancial strain on the system. 



2459 



FACIUnES AND EQUIPMENT & RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 

We approach the FY-94 F&E and R&D budget at a difficult time for aviation. Many expensive FAA efforts which we 
had hoped would have produced major gains in capacity and productivity for the aviation users have not come to 
fruition on time or within cost. Research and development, the key to our future, is only now beginning to recover 
from a long period of decline. There are all manner of prescriptions to save money by doing less. 

We believe the FAA budget needs to be judged from several perspectives: 

• Docs the expenditure offer tangible output which will improve the services FAA provides to the aviation 
public in terms of measurable safely and efficiency gains? 

• Does the expenditure attack problems which reduce safety, efficiency, or which prevent users of the 
aviation system from conducting their activities in a cost-effective way? 

• Docs the expenditure, in helping with the first two justifications, enhance the eminence of the United 
Stales by continuing lo assure the world's best, safest aviation system, whose products are attractive in 
world markets. 

• Since aviation is a major, high-multiplier generator of jobs and economic activity in the United Slates, 
will the expenditure contribute to job growth aixi the preservation of critical industries? 

Airlines, in their dire financial straits, are in many cases down-sizing, grounding aircraft and shrinking their new 
aircraft orders. Small general aviation has not recovered firom its problems. 

Perhaps the most cogent reason to pursue the improvement of the aviation system is illustrated by the high and con- 
tinuing cost of delays. 

These FAA figures which we cited earlier in our testimony dramatically illustrate the problem: 

Currently 23 airports suffer 20,000 hours of delay or more per year. If nothing is done to increase system capacity, 
FAA forecasts thai the number of airports with an aruiual 20,000 hours or more of delay per year will increase to 36 by 
the year 2001. 

Airport and airspace delays increased in 1992 by 4 percent over 1991 delays, according to ATA while the level of 
operations remained flat. In 1991, 297,758 aircraft operations were delayed IS minutes or more, according to the FAA. 
Can we afford the staggering amount of wasted expense in cost and work productivity? 

These two indicators show that the shortcomings of our technical infrastructure and the inefficiencies of the ATC 
system are costly lo the users of the system. They create major costs due to aircraft delays and inadequate capacity. 
Equally important, these inefficiencies hurt the economic competitiveness of the United States. 

The cost of delays is in the billions of dollars. Substantial reductions in delays alone would make a dramatic bottom 
line difference to the aviation industry. 

There is a need to create more runways and more airport infrastructure using AIP and PFC resources. This is necessary 
investment — not to build Taj Mahals, but lo provide the airport capacity which is the key ingredient to bring down the 
cost of delays. While new capacity may not be needed at the moment to accommodate more flights, new runways and 
improved airport infrastructure are potent weapons in the attempt to reduce the money drain that delays impose on 
airlines and their passengers. New runways and their related infrastructure are far and away the best way lo reduce 
delays at busy airports. 

FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT 

Last year airports testified in support of a $3 billion level for Facilities & Equipment, more than the Administration 
requested, in hopes that a decision would be made with respect to FAA facility consolidation and more funding would 
be needed to make the necessary and long-delayed adjustments to the badly needed automation system modernization. 
We understand that the decision has not yet been made, and that FAA is likely lo ask for a level of perhaps $2.6 to 2.7 
billion. 

Because we have not seen the details of FAA's budget proposal, we can only point lo several projects we see as most 
important: 

We believe the Advanced Automation System program is crucial and must be fully funded. We support the dramati- 
cally refocused AAS program for fT-94, despite the many past problems in this program. Good intentions are clearly 



2460 



present in FAA's current senior managers, but there has been a consistent pattern of failure and delay. We believe the 
AAS program should be carefully monitored and tied to results from the credible refocusing of the program. At the 
same time, we believe it is extremely important that FAA not be micro-managed. They should be given the nexibility 
to achieve results on time and within cost. We also believe they should be held accountable for getting the program 
solidly on track. If they are unable to do so, the users will not be able to support continuation of the program and its 
escalating costs. 

If the AAS program is to reach its objective of providing real benefits to the aviation system user, FAA must commit to 
a continuing real world assessment of user needs. This must be an ongoing process given the reality of technology 
evolution and the economic changes that are inevitable over the course of any multi-year development program. 

A major part of moving to a system which provides capacity, efficiency and delay reduction benefits to users is the 
early development of enroute, flow management and terminal/airport surface automation aids to controllers. While this 
work unfortunately remains in the R&D realm, it is imperative that the F&E program provide the technology "hooks 
and handles" to accommodate these delay-reducing automation tools as soon as their development is complete. 

We support the continued development and procurement of Miaowave Landing Systems for Category 2 and 3 
operations. While there is a growing view that satellite navigation will serve to provide universal non-precision 
approach capability and Category 1 service, we believe Category 2 and 3 operations must be served by a highly 
capable, but far simpler MLS than has been planned up to now. The development needs to go forward rapidly and 
innovatively. 

A proportionately large part of FAA's F&E budget goes to support contracts of various kinds. This is the direct result 
of decisions made twelve years ago not to increase FAA's internal personnel as the F&E task grew about ten-fold. It 
has resulted in FAA having to utilize a variety of support contractors to make up for its own inability to deal with its 
large tasks. It may be appropriate to reexamine the situation to establish clearly whether FAA still has the internal 
expertise to effectively manage and control its many contractors and helpers. 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 

We believe an appropriation of $300 million is justified for FY 1994 if we are to create the R&D effort and the results 
we need. 

The international aviation system has been built on innovations created for the most part in the United Slates, brought 
by imaginative research and development. 

FAA's Research and Development is begirming to revive after the years in which the NAS Plan needs predominated. 
FAA top management has been trying hard to rejuvenate real R&D. 

Industry's support for FAA's efforts and for a growing R,E&D budget has been based on the assumption of fijrther 
progress on a number of problems. Among them: strengthening FAA staffing, improving the transition from R,E&D to 
practical use, and the need for progress on system engineering decisions. There has been progress, but continuing 
attention needs to be focussed on the rigidity and complexity of the procurement process for R,E&D. 

The industry view on the need for substantive R&D was strengthened immeasurably by the January 1993 update of the 
Review of the FAA R,E&D Program by the blue-ribbon group headed by Norman Augustine, chairman and chief 
executive officer of the Martin-Marietta Corporation. The report deserves the attention and support of everyone 
interested in aviation and the continued eminence of the United States. 

Among its findings: 

• Research, Engineering and Development funding has declined in recent years from about 6 percent of 
the total FAA budget to about 2.5 percent, although a considerable part of the increase in spending in the 
early 1980's was to engineer the National Airspace System Plan. Although addressing a problem of 
major national consequence, this spending level represents a tiny percentage compared to most other 
govenuneni departments (10 percent for the Interior Department, 13 percent for Defense, 37 percent for 
Dept. of Energy) 

• The effort required — research and development and, later, implementation — for a number of evolution- 
ary improvements is clear. Bui for certain areas, the FAA system engineering process must generate 
system decisions and establish the future system architecture, which can then allow breaking major tasks 
into manageable development and implementation projects. 

• The safe achievement of additional airspace and airport system capacity be assigned as the highest 
priority within the FAA research, engineering and development activity. 



2461 



• Aiipoit capacity, although related to airspace capacity, is not a naturally limited commodity. Nonethe- 
less, there are not many sources of additional airpoil capacity. 

• The present airport system should be optimized through: physical airfield and terminal improvements 
and expansion; grouitd access enhancement; procedural/operational changes and flow management, and 
use of new capacity technology. The wake vortex problem, a major deterrent to the safe achievement of 
additional airport capacity, is representative of a problem in the past conduct of FAA research and 
development. The effort has often suffered from limited management attention, erratic funding and lack 
of focus. 

• At the growing number of airports where noise is a signiGcant factor in limiting capacity, other technolo- 
gies also offer promise. Wise use of curved, segmented and short final approach paths and flexible 
departure paths can provide significant beneCls. Flexible noise abatement procedures help, and the 
FAA's work to exploit better navigation capabilities (e.g., flight management/area navigation systems, 
the Microwave Landing System (MLS), and the Global Navigation Satellite System [GNSS]) needs to 
proceed rapidly. In the light of heavy federal investment in the Airport Improvement Program (AIPX 
with perhaps Si billion expended annually on airport pavement alone, a meaningful effort on product 
improvement research and development seems fully justifiable, especially if it is specific and directed at 
meaningful, measurable results. 

• Security is an area wherein considerable progress has been made throughout the world, although enor- 
mous challenges remain.The general approach to this problem hks been more of a "bottom-up" character 
than a structured top down effort related to the real threat and consequent objectives. It is essential to 
study the philosophical underpirmings of the approach to security and to apply techniques flexibly and 
cost-effectively. 

We propose that the FAA budget request which we believe will be on the order of $250 or $260 million, be augmented 
to at least $300 million, with the following specific augmentations: 

A. Airport Pavement R&D, to move toward a new universal pavement design methodology, the building of 
new and instrumented test pavements, and the long term data gathering and proof testing of new con- 
cepts and methodologies: an increase of $11 millioii 

The clear payoff is in the potential for improvement of the design and longevity of airport pavements 
and permitting rational planning of airport pavements properly designed for a future with larger, heavier 
aircraft. The investment suggested as a beginning for a long term program is a small percentage of the 
approximate $1 Billion armual federal investment in airport pavement. 

B. For a revitalized effort to ameliorate the effects of wake vortices: an increase of $8 million 

The payoff is in regaining a large part of the 12-15 percent airport capacity lost as a result of the wake 
vortex restrictions. 

C. To increase the emphasis on exploitation of new concepts and technologies for airport surface traffic 
management/runway incursion control: an increase of $5 million 

The problem of runway incursions, which spawned two major on-airport collisions in 1991, is best dealt 
with by energetic development of a modem airport surface traffic management system. Such a system, 
composed of many elements, can simultaneously reduce the risk of incursions and improve the efB- 
dency of airport operations. It is a valuable investment in safety and capacity. 

D. For an inaease in the extent of effort and the time required for completion of development of real 
terminal area automation and ghosting display applications: an increase of $5 million 

Compelling studies have shown that reduction of variability of arrival and departure streams can offer 
approx. 12 percent of additional capacity. Autonution aids for controller to help them belter handle the 
large number of variables which are part of the ATC process are a fine investment in both safety and 
capacity. 

E. For an intense high priority effort on satellite navigation, so as to focilitate utilization of the U.S. Global 
Positioning System (GPSyiCAO Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS). Development of ground 
differential stations and landing capability demonstrations, integrity monitoring, verification of autono- 
mous integrity monitoring: an inaease of $3 million 

This new system promises to revolutionize the way in which aircraft (and many other vehicles navigate, 
and as a new primary surveillance tool. The degree to which it can operate autonomously without 



2462 



elaborate ground aids will to large degree establish its value. An energetic developnnent effort now to 
answer the remaining questions will yield a high return to U.S. and world aviation and beyond. 

F. For the support research and development required for the system engineering design of the future 
system, especially for the integration of the various FAA automation efforts and Dow management/ 
control projects: an inaease of $5 million 

FAA faces a series of primary issues, the answers to which are essential if rational R&D effort is to be 
undertaken, and if cost-effective system implementation is to be achieved. 

G. To increase the emphasis on introduction of enroute automation (AERA) into the ATC system, and to 
assure smooth integrated traffic management transition from enroute/to terminal area/to on-aiiport- 
surface automation: an increase of $10 million 

The best hope for efficient and operationally sensible handling of aircraft in the future ever-more-dense 
traffic envirotmient lies in the introduction of automation aids to help controller handle the large number 
of variables, consider the needs and wishes of the aircraft operators, and make best use of the dynami- 
cally changing weather and winds aloft situation. 

H. For an analysis and demonstration of the value of TCAS technology and cockpit traffic displays to 
achieve safe inaeases in terminal area capacity: an inaease of $2 million 

Even a small percentage of dynamic longitudinal spacing reduction has direct capacity payoff, in 
addition to the safety and confidence provided when pilots have improved awareness of surrounding 
traffic. 

I. To inaease FAA R&D efforts in airport wildlife control and to permit FAA to complete its commitment 
to support the work on the Animal Conuol Program with emphasis on efforts to reduce bird-airaaft 
collisions: an inaease of $0J million 

Bird strikes continue to do damage to the aviation system, and a continuing promising research effort 
needs to be pursued. 

Finally, we recommend that $300,000 be available to Requirements and Technical Concepts for Aviation (RTCA), a 
non-profit organization, to develop Minimum Aviation Systems Performance Standards, Minimum Operational Perfor- 
mance Standards and such other special studies that may be requested by FAA to enhance safety, efficiency and capacity 
of the nation's airspace and airport system and to facilitate the introduction of new technology into that system for the 
same purposes. 

It seems especially appropriate to examine the ratios between FAA's several R&D activities. Last year the amount 
appropriated for FAA's primary mission, the aeation of an efficient ATC infrastructure (ATC and CNS) was about $95 
million. $84 million went for Airaaft Safety and Security, nearly $24 million for explosives detection research. Only $5.5 
million was appropriated for Airport Technology. These ratios seem lopsided, especially with respect to airport technol- 
ogy, since there is a large investment of airport aid funds for airport pavements, and airport capacity limitations are the 
major source of the delay costs we all deplore. Directed research and development of the most practical kind in these areas 
can yield very large payback to the nation, and thus we propose significant additions to the expected FAA budget. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, we appreciate the opportunity to share our views on the aitically 
important funding issues faced by the Congress this year as it relates to transportation in general, and aviation and airport 
issues more specifically. We pledge our support and assistance in moving the process forward. Thank you. 



2463 

CENTER FOR MARDSfE CONSERVATION 
STATEMENT OF R. GARY MAGNUSON, VICE PRESIDENT 

Kfr. Chairman, Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for this 
opportunity to present testimony on behalf of the Center for Marine Conservation 
regarding United States Coast Guard appropriations for Fiscal Year 1994. I am 
Gary Magnuson, Vice President for Programs for the Center for Marine 
Conservation (CMC). In order for the United States Coast Guard to be effective 
in carrying out its marine resource protection activities, the CMC urges your 
support for the following funding recommendations for fiscal year 1994: 

• $164,000 for the National Response Center 

• $5,300,000 for electronic data systems 

• $8,800,000 for environmental compliance programs 

• $2,374,000 for living marine resource enforcement 

Introduction 

The Center for Marine Conservation (CMC) is a national, non-profit 
organization of 1 10,000 members dedicated to the conservation of the diversity 
and abundance of life in the oceans and coastal areas. The CMC works to prevent 
the over-exploitation of living marine resources, the degradation of marine 
ecosystems, and to restore marine wildlife and their ecosystems where they have 
been diminished. 

Our knowledge of the USCG, its organization and activities, has come 
about principally through projects we have conducted under the CMC's Pollution 
Prevention Program. Since 1985, the majority of our pollution prevention efforts 



2464 

have focused on the problem of manmade wastes in the marine environment, or 
marine debris. We have concentrated on documenting the harmful effects of 
debris and campaigning through our beach cleanups and other advocacy for 
changes in U.S. law to prohibit disposal of plastics at sea. We have become the 
most active non-governmental entity involved in marine debris research and 
education during the last seven years. Ehiring this time, the United States ratified 
Annex V of the international MARPOL Treaty and enacted the U.S. Marine 
Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act of 1987. 

Our work in these areas has provided unique opportunities to learn about 
the operations and programs of the United States Coast Guard. For example, 
since 1988 CMC has worked with the USCG, in addition to the National Oceanic 
and Atmospheric Administration and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
on the International Coastal Cleanup Campaign, an ongoing program that involves 
citizens in monitoring and reporting beach debris. At annual beach cleanups held 
in September, volunteers pick up trash off the beach and catalogue each piece on a 
detailed data card. The information is compiled and published by CMC, and used 
to determine trends, sources, and possible solutions to marine debris. Last year 
during the 1992 three-hour cleanup, more than 162,000 volunteers in 33 U.S. 
states and territories, and 32 foreign countries picked up approximately 3.6 million 
pounds of trash. 

In addition to supporting the International Coastal Cleanup Campaign, the 
USCG has worked with the CMC in analyzing the data to assess sources of debris. 
The USCG has also assisted the CMC in distributing the final cleanup report 



2465 

internationally through the International Maritime Organization, the governing 
body overseeing MARPOL Annex V. 

CMC has also worked with the USCG in the dissemination of educational 
materials on marine debris. The CMC's education work started when we 
established tlie nation's first clearinghouse for marine debris information in 1986. 
Working with the Society of the Plastics Industry and the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NO A A), CMC developed a national public awareness 
campaign directed primarily at marine user groups. Subsequently CMC was 
awarded a contract with NOAA to operate the nation's Marine Debris Information 
Offices (MDIO) which communicate with hundreds of people each month about 
the problems of and solutions to marine debris. The USCG has participated in 
these activities by distributing educational materials through headquarters, field 
units, the National Safe Boating Campaign, and the USCG Auxiliary. For 
instance, over the last four years, CMC's MDIO provided the USCG Auxiliary 
with more than 330,000 marine debris information pamphlets for boaters and 
60,000 placards required aboard vessels over 26 feet describing the waste handling 
requirements of the MPPRCA. The CMC has also worked closely with the USCG 
in the development of some of these materials such as the placard. 

In addition, the CMC worked with the USCG on a project designed to 
encourage the formation of volunteer groups, designated as "Citizen Pollution 
Patrols." In 1990, CMC received a one-year grant from the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) to develop a demonstration project in New Jersey and 
Maryland to test citizen reporting as authorized under MPPRCA. Citizens were 
trained to assist in monitoring, reporting, cleanup, and prevention of ocean and 



7fi_f;QT n _ Q/t 



2466 

shoreline pollution. As a result, this project showed us, first hand, the abilities 
and limitations of the USCG including working with citizen reports on dumping 
violations, and its implementation of the MPPRCA. 

CMC has also served with the USCG on several nationally recognized 
foiums and committees to address the marine debris problem including the 
National Marine Debris Roundtable, the Caribbean Marine Debris Workshop 
Steering Committee, and the Third International Conference on Marine Debris 
Steering Committee. 

Demonstrated USCG Commitment to Environmental Protection 

Through the relationships described above we have come to understand and 
appreciate the extensive responsibilities placed upon the United States Coast Guard 
(USCG). 

With respect to USCG environmental protection responsibilities, we are 
pleased to report that the USCG has improved its implementation of the 
MPPRCA. For instance, the USCG instigated changes to enable the U.S. to take 
more severe actions against MARPOL infractions. Formerly, if a MARPOL 
flagged ship was found in violation of MPPRCA more than lliree miles from the 
U.S. shore, the violation report was sent through the Department of State to the 
flag country. The USCG would take no further action. This system had very 
little effect on the foreign ships. Of approximately 1 10 violations sent back to 
foreign countries, only two fines were ever assessed by those countries. Now it is 
USCG policy to lake enforcement action against all suspected violations that have 



2467 

occurred within Uie U.S. 200 mile Exclusive Econotnic Zone, as well as all 
navigable waters of the United States. In addition, the USCG worked to change 
U.S. sanctions so that a person who knowingly violates MARPOL 73/78 commits 
a class "D" felony punishable by imprisonment of not more tlian six years and a 
fine of up to $250,000 for an individual and up to $500,000 for an organization. 

Recendy, the USCG demonstrated their commitment to enforcing the 
improved MPPRCA regulations by working on a case against Princess Cruise 
Lines with the Department of Justice. The case centered on the illegal overboard 
disposal of plastics off the Florida Keys. It resulted in a fine of $500,000. 

Other initiatives that show a commitment to environmental protection 
include strengthening their relationship with the US Department of Agriculture 
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service in inspecting ships, aggressively 
pursuing work on the logbook requirement for ships, providing new poUcy 
guidance to field staff, sending experts from USCG headquarters to field units to 
relay MARPOL guidance in person, and developing educational materials for 
USCG personnel in order for them to better understand the law. Additionally, the 
USCG recendy organized a MARPOL Annex V Summit to foster better 
communications and coordination among federal agencies and others involved in 
the implementation of the law. We understand that the USCG intends to conduct a 
series of meetings to solicit input fi'om the environmental community to help 
maximize their overall role in marine environmental protection. 



2468 

Support for Future IJS CG Environmental Protection Activiries 

In order to maintain this positive momentum, we recommend that funding 
as requested by the United States Coast Guard for fiscal year 1994 be approved by 
the Subcommittee to ensure that the United States Coast Guard (USCG) can 
adequately carry out all its environmental initiatives. This includes all 
environmental enforcement, monitoring, response and port safety. We also 
support all funding for proposed activities that will increase USCG ti^aining and 
education with regard to environmental missions. Environmental training and 
education will not only assist USCG personnel in effectively carrying out tlieir 
duties, but USCG personnel should be encouraged to utilize education and titiining 
as a means to achieve compliance with environmental protection measures among 
marine user groups. 

Finally, CMC wishes to comment on specific budget items identified by the 
USCG in their budget justification for Fiscal Year 1994. In particular, we support 
the Coast Guard's requests for the following: 

a) $164,000 for improvement of the capabilities of the 
National Response Center; 

b) $5,300,000 for improvement of the USCG's electronic 
data systems; 

c) $8,800,000 for environmental compliance programs and 
activities; and 

d) $2,374,000 for improvement of living marine resources 
enforcement. 



2469 
a. National Response Center 

The National Response Center (NRC) serves as the nation's hotline for 
reporting environmental contamination. This includes unauthorized or accidental 
discharges of chemicals, oil, radiological, biological, or etiological substances. 
The NRC forwards all discharge reports to pre-designated Federal On Scene 
Coordinators who initiate response action. The NRC also serves as the 
coordination point for 15 federal agencies that make up the National Response 
Team. 

During CMC's Citizen Pollution Patrol Project, efforts were made to funnel 
citizen reports of MPPRCA violations through the National Response Center 
(NRC). This proposal was met with concern, however, because NRC staff did not 
believe adequate resources were available to respond to the citizen's reports. In 
fact, during peak periods of activity as many as 20 percent of the incoming phone 
calls do not reach an NRC duty officer. 

Therefore, CMC supports the USCG's request of $164,000 to support the 
NRC. This funding would be used to address the need for additional 
watchstanders to provide immediate response and timely notification to Federal On 
Scene Coordinators regarding incident reports. With these funds, it is expected 
that the NRC would increase its involvement with citizen reports of violations of 
Uie MPPRCA. 



2470 

b. Improve Electronic Data Systems 

CMC supports the USCG's request of $5,300,000 to estabiisli tJje Marine 
Information for Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE) electronic data system 
which would combine the former Marine Safety Network (MSN), Vessel 
Identiflcation and Documentation Systems (VIDS) and Law Enforcement 
Information Systems II (LEIS II). By doing so, the USCG will be better able to 
meet the needs of the Office of Marine Safety, Security and Environmental 
Protection and the Law Enforcement Program's information needs. Recent 
improvements in the USCG's Marine Safety Information System, for example, not 
only enabled the agency to better track ships that violate MARPOL Annex V, but 
facilitated interagency cooperation based on reports provided by inspections 
conducted by Department of Agriculture, Animal Plant and Health Inspection 
Officers. 

c. Environmental Compliance Programs and Activities 

CMC supports the USCG's request of $8,800,000 for activities that will 
bring USCG vessels and facilities into environmental compliance. While the 
USCG is charged with enforcing environmental laws and regulations, it must also 
be held accountable to the same compliance standards. This includes making the 
necessary modifications to its vessels and vessel operations to satisfy the 
limitations placed on public vessels as required by the Marine Plastic Pollution 
Research and Control Act of 1987. Therefore, we urge the Subcommittee's 
approval of the requested funds for a small cutter plastic waste handling study, 
support any additional associated costs including materials substitution/process 
changes, training, evaluations and administrative activities. 



2471 

d. Improve Living Marine Resource Enforcement 

The USCG is the lead agency for at-sea enforcement of laws and 
regulations protecting living marine resources. Over the past 15 years there has 
been an increase in the number of fisheries and other living marine resources 
managed under the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the 
Marine Mammal Protection Act, and the Endangered Species Act. At the same 
time, the number of international agreements has more than doubled as U.S. 
concerns have expanded into international waters. 

CMC, therefore, urges the Subcommittee's supports for the USCG's 
request of $2,374,000 to increase the number of staff assigned to living marine 
resources protection. It is our understanding that the USCG would utilize this 
increase in staff support to improve tlie liaison with Fisheries Management 
Councils; review of proposed fishery management and conservation measures; the 
execution of international fisheries agreements; the coordination/utilization of 
operational resources; and outreach activities with the fishing industry, other 
federal agencies, Congress and the general public. In addition, tliese funds would 
also be used to implement regionalized training programs that are critical to 
effective enforcement of living marine resources laws, regulations, and 
international agreements. Enhanced fisheries training is a key component to tlie 
USCG's fisheries law enforcement strategy. 

The diverse activities of the USCG's Marine Environmental Protection 
branch deserve our full support and full funding. Marine protection activities are 
some of the most visible and pro-active functions of the Coast Guard. We 
appreciate your support of this work and thank you for the opportunity to present 
this testimony. 

Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony. 



2472 

COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA 
STATEMENT OF DAVID RAPHAEL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

Chairman Lautenberg and other members of the committee. My 
name is David Raphael and I am the Executive Director of the 
Community Transportation Association of America (CTAA) , a 
national membership organization of rural, small urban and 
specialized transportation providers and advocates. Our nearly 
800 members are located in every state of the union. The sector 
of the transit industry they represent includes nearly 1,300 
agencies funded under FTA's Sec. 18 program for rural areas, more 
than 200 small urban agencies funded under Sec. 9(d), and several 
thousand specialized providers responding to the mobility needs 
of specific groups. About 3,500 of these are local agencies 
receiving capital assistance under FTA's Sec. 16 program to meet 
the special mobility needs of older Americans and persons with 
disabilities. We appreciate this opportunity to provide you with 
our recommendations on Fiscal '94 funding for Federal transit 
programs. 

One of the key characteristics of the community 
transportation network, including the public transit part of it, 
is the extent to which the focus of our activities is people who 
have no mobility alternatives — the people we call the "transit 
dependent": the elderly, people with disabilities and low-income 
households. 

Nearly 40 percent of the ridership of Section 18 providers 
is elderly, a share more than twice their share of the 
population. Operators report that 40 percent of the trips they 
provide are in connection with health care or other specific 
social services. A comparison of transit bus riders in Florida 
found that more than 60 percent of the ridership on the rural and 
small urban systems had incomes of less than $15,000, while the 
comparable figure for the metropolitan system was 13 percent. 
These figures reflect the fact that public transportation is 
often the vital link for transit dependent people — to jobs and 
job-training, to health care and to continued independence in 
living arrangements. 

Federal Transit Administration data also make it clear that 
rural and small urban transit is the most dependent on Federal 
funds for its operations. The Sec. 18 and Sec. 9(d) network 
relies on FTA funds for 25 percent of its operating budget. For 
urbanized areas of 200,000 to a million in population, the figure 
is half that, and for systems serving areas of a million or more, 
FTA funds make up only 4 percent of the total. This means, for 
instance, that an "across-the-board" reduction in formula funding 
— such as occurred in last year's appropriations — does not 
really affect everyone equally. It is significantly more painful 
for the rural and small urban operators. 

The inequity was even more marked since the cut in formula 
programs served to pay for an increase in discretionary 
assistance, the greatest share of which went to those largest 
urbanized areas. 

The more than 1,400 FTA-funded rural and small urban public 
transportation agencies provide more than 300 million trips a 
year, at least one-third of them in rural areas. But the 
availability of this alternative for travel is far from 
universal. In more than 900 of the nation's 2,400 
nonmetropolitan counties, there is currently no FTA-assisted 
public transportation service. In those counties where service 



2473 



exists, it is often confined to only part of the county or is 
infrequent in character or both. When the Census Bureau, in 
1989, asked households in nonmetropolitan towns of 2,500 or more 
about the availability of public transportation, two-thirds of 
them reported that there is none. 

It will not surprise you to hear that we support funding of 
transportation programs at the full authorized levels set forth 
in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) . 
We would point out, as we did last year, that, for transit, such 
a funding level, if adjusted for inflation, would still be well 
below that of a decade ago. 

At the same time, we recognize that this level of funding 
may not be possible under the terms of the FY '94 budget 
resolution. If that is the case, we urge you, in lieu of "full 
funding," to provide at least proportional funding — maintaining 
the balance between highway programs and transit programs set 
forth in ISTEA. Put another way, if the budget resolution 
requires a reduction from the full authorization levels, we ask 
that such a reduction be applied equally to highways and transit. 
Under such an approach, it should be possible to fund transit at 
least at the dollar-level recommended by the President. For the 
programs in which our membership has the greatest interest, that 
funding (at 85 percent of the authorized levels) would mean: 

$ 209 million in formula assistance to operators in 

small urbanized areas; 
$ 131 million in formula assistance to rural areas 

(under Sec. 18) ; 
$ 58 million in Sec. 16 capital assistance for 

transportation of the elderly and persons with 

disabilities; and 
$ 6.5 million for the Rural Transit Assistance Program 

(RTAP) . 

RTAP Funding - With respect to the last item — funding for the 
very successful program of training and technical assistance 
through RTAP — we are recommending that the committee provide 
funding at the 0.15 percent share of total funding that ISTEA 
calls for. In both last year's appropriations and this year's 
budget request of the Administration, over-all research and 
technical assistance funding has been held at a constant level 
and, consequently, RTAP funding has been held constant with it, 
rather than increasing as ISTEA intended when the FTA budget goes 
up. We urge you to break that pattern and give RTAP the increase 
it has long merited. 

Balance Bteween Formula and Discretionary - We are pleased that 
the President has recommended, in his proposed FTA budget for 
Fiscal 1994, a ratio of formula to discretionary assistance that 
is quite close to the ratio provided under ISTEA. We urge this 
committee to do likewise. 

Operating Assistance - In addition to recommending substantially 
increased FTA funding, we would urge, in recognition of their 
greater dependence on Federal funds, that transit agencies in 
small urbanized areas be provided their full authorized operating 
assistance of $184.4 million, even if it is not possible to 
provide the full authorized level of operating assistance to all 
urban systems. It is such a small part of the total operating 
assistance component that meeting this important need should be 
an achievable goal. 

Sec. 18 (i) Intercity Services - We would also urge, in 
recognition of the fact that the intercity set-aside under Sec. 



2474 



18 (i) was enacted on the assumption of full funding of the 
program, that the FY '94 earmark for this category be continued at 
10 percent of total Sec. 18 funding in FY '94 in the absence of 
full funding. If this is not done, funding for the intercity 
program will more than double while the rest of the Sec. 18 
program will increase by less than 36 percent. Holding the set- 
aside at the 10 percent level for another year will assure an 
equal rate of increase. 

The Costs of Isolation - In support of the increased transit 
funding levels recommended by the Administration, we would cite 
the need for expanded infrastructure investment which the 
President and others have emphasized, the economic advantages, 
both short-term and long-term, to be expected from increased 
transit funding, and the fact that, as I noted earlier, a great 
deal remains to be done before all Americans have equal access to 
public transportation services. People who have inadequate 
transportation resources of their own — and one out of every 13 
rural households is without any vehicle at all — and don't live 
in an area served by public transportation are stuck, isolated, 
cut off from the rest of us. 

They pay a high price for their isolation and so does the 
nation: 

• Rural women without access to adequate prenatal care are far 

more likely to have a low birth-weight child requiring 
intensive initial care at very high costs. 

• Study after study shows that inadequate transportation is the 

single largest barrier facing welfare recipients seeking 
greater self-sufficiency through job-training programs or 
regular work. 

• The frail elderly who live in areas without adequate 

transportation are forced out of their own homes and into 
nursing homes earlier and the costs of their care gets added 
to the nation's Medicaid bill just that much sooner. 

CTA-A Survey of Rural and Small Urban Transit Needs - We would 
also like to call to the committee's attention the results of a 
needs survey which our organization carried out earlier this 
year. He received responses from nearly 400 agencies 
representing the equivalent of about one-third of the rural and 
small urban public transportation network. The typical 
respondent indicated a need for an immediate increase in 
operating budget of 42 percent. The respondents reported that 
one-third of their current vehicles (or about 6,000 for the 
network as a whole) need replacement and that they also have 
substantial needs for expanding those existing fleets. The 
vehicle needs indicated would require $590 million in capital (or 
a Federal share of $473 million at 80 percent) . Other short-term 
capital needs (for projects "that could get under way this year 
or next") amount to $330 million (or $266 million in Federal 
investment) . 

Conclusion - In short, even full funding of the ISTEA-authorized 
levels for transit programs would not meet all of the Immediate 
needs of existing service providers — much less extend service 
to areas in which it does not yet exist. He ask this committee 
to do the best that it can for rural and small urban America's 
mobility needs. And we especially ask that you tailor your tough 
decisions to assure an equitable sharing of both pain and gain. 
Thank you again for this opportunity to have our views 
considered. 



2475 



STATEMENT OF THE NATIONAL AIR TRANSPORTATION 

ASSOCIATION 

The National Air Transportation Association (NATA) represents the 
business interests of the nation's general aviation service businesses. These 
companies provide aircraft fueling, aircraft charter, maintenance and repair, 
flight training, aircraft sales and a host of other services to the general 
aviation, airline and military community. It is their obvious interest in the 
nation's air transportation system that prompts the followring comments on 
appropriating funds to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 

A recent survey of NATA members indicated a continued decline in 
profits for those companies that were even earning a profit at all. (See 
Attachment A) The following chart illustrates the percentage of companies 
earning a given net profit^ As can easily be see from the ch«u*t, the 
profitability of general aviation companies has declined for the past three 
years. Specifically, the number of companies earning a net profit in excess of 
10% has declined from 18% in 1990 to 7% in 1992. 

Net Profit of Member Companies 

Net Profit as Percentage Year 

of Gross Sales 12211 1991 1222 

Greater than 10% 18% 13% 7% 

6% -10% 30% 23% 24% 

l%-5% 52% 64% 69% 

Even more surprising than the general reduction in the profitability of the 
industry is the absolute lack of a profit for over one-third of all member 
companies even though about half of the member companies indicated they 
did better economically in 1992 than in the previous year. 

GENERAL REMARKS ON FAA FUNDING 

NATA has long opposed the policy of funding the FAA Operations 
Budget from revenues generated under the authority of the Airport and 
Airway Trust Fund. With a balance in the Trust Fund generally around $15 



^ 1993 Industry Barometer Survey Results 



2476 



billion, NATA members are becoming increasingly less willing to contribute 
to a program that appears to only benefit the accountants at the Office of 
Management and Budget. In fact, some NATA members have requested that 
the Association advocate a transportation tax abeyance program until the 
Trust Fund is drawn down and used for its intended purpose — capital 
improvements to the nation's airport and airway system. 

NATA is concerned about several specific areas of funding. Among 
these areas is provision for FAA continuation of basic industry support 
services. Also important, is the apparent need for congressional support for 
implementation of new technology, strategic planning for use of that 
technology, and finally, the cessation of further procurement of outdated 
and /or obsolescent technology. 

LINE ITEM PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS 

FAA Personnel Travel Allowances 

NATA members have long relied on the ability of the Association to 
provide good public relations opportunities for the FAA in the form of 
industry out-reach, training and general public awareness. Recently however, 
the FAA has drastically reduced the number of public forums and meetings 
they participate in due to budgetary constraints. NATA therefore requests 
that FAA travel allowances be adequately ftmded to the fullest extent possible 
to support the industry they regulate. NATA does not have a line item dollar 
amount, but NATA believes that FAA representatives should be able to fully 
represent the FAA on industry/government committees, including activities 
related to the FAR/JAR harmonization; they should be able to attend and 
participate in trade association conventions, including state associations; and, 
generally, they should be able to participate in any public forum that enhances 
cooperation vdthin the industry and, increases safety, compliance and general 
awareness of their activities. 

FAA Personnel Training 

Also of importance to NATA members is the training provided to 
FAA inspectors on specific types of aircraft. NATA members rely upon 
adequately trained irxspectors to observe air crew performance and safety. In 
fact. Congress has accused the FAA of inadequate inspection of the on- 
demand air charter (air taxi) industry^. Only with funds sufficiently 



2 Trobtems Persist In FAAs Inspection Program", GAO Report RCED-92-14 



2477 



appropriated to meet the inspection requirements of the industry, can FAA 
achieve the level of surveillance appropriate to this class of of>erators. 
Specifically, each region of the FAA needs a number of qualified inspectors 
for each type of aircraft generally used by operators within that region. 

The only alternative to the government expending funds on 
maintaining (or even expanding) the current inspector work force is for those 
duties to be delegated to the air carriers v^th FAA approval. This process has 
been in wide use by the major airlines, but FAA seems to be reluctant to do 
the same for on-demand air taxis or small airlines. It may be that the only 
positive aspect of the tight funding situation is better delegation of the 
inspector duties to air carriers. NATA would strongly endorse such a policy, 
esf>ecially in areas where a qualified inspector force was not justifiable under 
current economic conditions. 

Designated Examiner Program Required Course 

Although FAA has made advancement toward the delegation of 
certain duties to air carriers, flight schools and maintenance facilities, it 
recently took a step backwards. As part of the Designated Examiner program 
requirements, individuals holding this charge are now required to attend a 
standardized course accompanied by FAA inspectors conducting annual 
training. The purix)se of the Designated Examiner type programs is to 
increase the industry's efficiency, by eliminating delays caused by overworked 
FAA insjTectors. Recently however, the FAA began charging $60 f)er day for 
courses they offer to these volunteers. This cost, a total of $180 for most 
courses, is levied upon those individuals and companies who have already 
volunteered to spend their time on the designated examiner program. This 
industry effort helps to alleviate FAA's workload, where permitted, and 
increases the efficiency of the industry as a whole. 

NATA believes that the designated examiner type programs should be 
funded to a level that would permit individuals to join the program at no 
additional cost; levels that would allow the program to expand, increasing 
FAA efficiency. 

Designated Registration Representative 

Under new requirements mandated upon the general aviation 
industry by Congress via the Federal Aviation Administration Drug 
Enforcement Assistance Act of 1988 the goal of intervening and ceasing the 
flow of illegal substances into the U.S. by small aircraft was established. This 



2478 



goal was to be accomplished in a variety of means, with aircraft titling and 
registration being a significant provision of these means. This provision was 
to be enhanced by a FAA Designated Registration Representative. 

However, without sufficient funding to also support this element of 
this Act, Congress will fall short of their stated goal. Consequently, NATA 
believes that Congress should appropriate and encourage the necessary 
resources to support the Designated Registration Representative. 

FAA's Accident Prevention Program 

Because Congress has mandated FAA's primary function to ensure a 
safe air transportation system, it is a sad irony that the FAA Accident 
Prevention Program is one of the most poorly funded areas in the FAA. The 
program is also under-utilized due to funding constraints. This under- 
funding is reminiscent of the situation where municipalities did not erect 
railroad crossing guards until a vehicle was smashed by a train and people 
were killed. 

NATA believes that greater focus should be placed upon the Accident 
Prevention Program. Funding for the program should include monies for 
program expansion to include courses across the country required to meet 
regulatory requirements. For example, FAA's Drug Abatement branch will 
soon require training for persons to supervise collection and remittance of 
alcohol tests. This training could, and should, be provided by the FAA under 
the appropriate banner of accident prevention. The same situation exists 
with the designated examiner type programs wherein courses required for 
that program could also be made available, and appropriately so, by the 
Accident Prevention Program. 

Global Positioning System Implementation 

Implementation of the GPS satellite navigation system is probably the 
least strategic budgetary program under FAA control. Had FAA "jumped on 
the band wagon" when the industry began touting the benefits of GPS, the 
cost savings by now to the federal government would be significant. NATA 
believes that Congress should appropriate funds and mandate a much faster 
implementation schedule for the GPS network than is currently planned. 

Congress and the FAA now have the capability to make a strategic 
investment in the nation's airspace system by swiftly transitioning the 
current land-based navigational system to that of a satellite-based system. To 



2479 



do so. Congress and the FAA would save the nation's taxpayers hundreds of 
millions of dollars on annual installation and maintenance of land-based 
navigational aids. 

To accomplish this task, NATA recommends that Congress require 
early civilian control of the currently military operated system. This 
changeover should include elimination of the system errors insisted on by 
the military. Appropriations for development of aircraft-based satellite 
receivers capable of navigation to a degree of accuracy necessary for IFR flight 
are also needed. Along with appropriate aircraft based equipment, the 
development of procedures for GPS precision instrument approaches is also 
necessary. 

DUATS 

FAA developed and implemented DUATS to take a place next to 
expensive Flight Service Stations (FSS). The FAA brought this system to a 
height in popularity with the flying public and then proposed to either "pull 
the plug" or charge users for this safety-related product. NATA believes this 
system should be maintained and encouraged, especially considering 
increasing FSS closures. 

NATA estimates that the total cost of all FSS contacts by pilots is 
approximately $15 - $20 million (staff time only). By comparison, DUATS is 
proposed at $11.3 million and is more efficient and economical than the FSS 
program has been for many years. The FAA has even suggested the use of a 
900 number to bill pilots for use of the service, when in fact, pilots are already 
paying $0,151 or $0,176 per gallon of fuel in federal taxes that is supposed to 
support such a system. 

Another extremely important factor of DUATS, which must be 
accounted for, is its capacity for augmenting the GPS program. Currently, 
FAA is predicting that himdreds of Notices To Airmen (NOTAMs) would 
have to be made daily to ensure the safety of aircraft using GPS. The FAA is 
unable to provide that kind of support with the current NOTAM system. 
However, NATA believes that such requirements could easily be met 
graphically with DUATS. (See attachment B) 

FAA SPENDING CUT RECOMMENDATIONS 

Several programs cuiTently being pursued by the FAA should be cut, 
primarily due to inefficient technology, cost, amd time overruns. NATA 



2480 



recommends a complete reevaluation of the effectiveness and efficiency of 
many of the FAA's large projects. Specifically, NATA believes and concurs 
with many organizations that substantial savings can be made by the FAA in 
Microwave Landing System (MLS) and the Advanced Automation System 
(AAS). 

Microwave Landing System 

NATA believes that the single largest FAA budget savings could come 
with the elimination of the Microwave Landing System (MLS) program. Put 
simply, NATA believes that the goals of MLS can be accomplished by GPS. 

CONCLUSION 

FAA Services - An Industry Need 

For years, FAA has been able to provide the fundamental services of 
aircraft, airmen and operator inspection and training. Recently FAA 
budgetary constraints have brought the level of service required by the 
industry to a level below which NATA feels is acceptable. FAA and Congress 
should fully fund these programs and services or delegate those services to 
private industry. NATA believes that privatization of these inspection 
services through Designated Examiners can be the most efficient means for 
the air charter, flight training and aircraft maintenance industry to conduct 
business. 

Strategic Plan for GPS Needed Yesterday! 

NATA believes that GPS has the capability, is the optimum technical 
solution, and should be fully supported and funded by Congress and the FAA. 
NATA encourages the FAA to undertake a rapid strategic plan for the 
development and utilization of GPS navigation as both a navigation and 
approach aid. Congress should find this to be one of the best ways to save 
costs within the FAA budget. 

General Aviation and The GA Services Business 

Since the late 70's, the declining aircraft market has caused a 
tremendous do vm turn in the general aviation industry. As illustrated 
previously, NATA members have seen a significant reduction in profitability, 
and the aviation industry as a whole has declined to the point of Presidential 



2481 



intervention^. Congress has the capability to save 100,000 plus jobs in the GA 
services industry, thousands of jobs dwindling away in the aircraft 
manufacturing industry, and the general loss of that industry to foreign 
competition by supporting Product Liability Reform. 

NATA's BOTTOM LINE 

• Reduce the Tax Burden on the Aviation Industry 

• Ensure FAA Spending on Efficient Programs 

Expedient Implementation of GPS 
Elimination of the MLS Program 
Suppxirt of the DUATS Program 

• Ensure FAA Services to Increase Industry and Government Efficiency 

• Support Product Liability Reform 

Thank you for this opportunity to present our views on appropriation 
of funds to the Federal Aviation Administration. NATA is eager to discuss 
the views we have expressed in this testimony with this committee at the 
first opportunity. 



The President's Commission to Ensure a Strong Competitive Airline Industry 



2482 



ATTAQMENT A 



1992 
NATA INDUSTRY BAROMETER 

SURVEY RESULTS 
THE 1992 SURVEY 

The 1992 NATA Industry Barometer Survey was distributed to NATA Member companies in 
early 1992. In the survey. Members were asked to answer various questions about their 
company's 1991 performance and projections for 1992. The following represents selected 
Information compiled from the survey results of the over 200 Member company respondents. 
The results are presented with corresponding questions. 



NET PROFIT PICTURE 

Did your company (or base if part of large organization) make a net profit? 

Percentage of respondents reporting a Net Profit for the corresponding years and their 
projections for 1992. 



REPORTED 



PROJECTED 



REPORTED 



PROJECTED 



199Q 
YES e6% 

NO 34% 



78% 
22% 



iSQl 
57% 
43% 



1292 
76% 
24% 



Distribution of respondents 
reporting a net profit: 



% Net Front 


1909 


1990 


1991 


1-5 


45% 


52% 


64% 


6-10 


28% 


30% 


23% 


More than 10 


27% 


18% 


13% 



How did your companys 1991 financial 
performance compare with that of 1990? 



Better than 1990 
About the Same 
Worse than 1990 



34% 
20% 
46% 



1991 NET PROFIT RESULTS 
BY REGION 

Did your company make a net profit? 



NO 

40% 
46% 
53% 
35% 
21% 
67% 
43% 
29% 
43% 



Did Your Company Make a 
Net Profit? 





YES 


NE 


60% 


EA 


54% 


SO 


47% 


n, 


65% 


CE 


79% 


SW 


33% 


WE 


57% 


NW 


71% 


USA 


57% 




NE EA SO GL CE SW WE NW USA 



Chart prepared by the FBO Resource Group. Inc. for the Nctloncd Air Transportation Associatlorx. 



2483 



SALES BT FROFTT CENTER 

Did sales for the following profit centers of your company (or base if part of a large organization) 
increase or decrease during 1991 as compared with 1990 and looking at 1991. do you ^nk the 
sales for the following profit centers will increase or decrease during 19927 



REPORIED CHANGES IN SALES 
1990 vs 1991 



Profit 
Center 

Air Charter 
Aircraft Mgmt 
Aircraft Rental 


% Reported 
Increases 

42% 
53% 
49% 


Average 
Increase 

36% 
28% 
17% 


% Reported 
Decreases 

58% 
47% 
51% 


Average 
Decrease 

24% 
25% 
16% 


Aircraft Sales (New) 
Aircraft Sales (Used) 
Avionics 


21% 
38% 
59% 


35% 
48% 
19% 


79% 
62% 
41% 


69% 

47% 
22% 


Flight Instruction 
Avgas Retail 
Jet Fuel Retail 




58% 
38% 
44% 


34% 
15% 
19% 


42% 
62% 
56% 


18% 
16% 
17% 


Maintenance 

Parts Sales 

Tie Down /Rental 




51% 
46% 
45% 


26% 
36% 
29% 


49% 
54% 
55% 


18% 
16% 
14% 



PROJECTED CHANGES IN SALES 
1991 vs 1992 



Profit % Expecting 
Center Increases 

Air Charter 69% 
Aircraft Mgmt 78% 
Aircraft Rental 72% 


Increase 

20% 
13% 
13% 


% Expecting 
Decreases 

317o 
22% 
28% 


Average 
Decrease 

16% 
19% 
14% 


Aircraft Sales (New) 
Aircraft Sales (Used) 
Avionics 


63% 
67% 
60% 


43% 
23% 
15% 


37% 
33% 
40% 


24% 
41% 
15% 


Flight Instruction 
Avgas Retail 
Jet Fuel Retail 


80% 
69% 
75% 


20% 
12% 
13% 


20% 
31% 
25% 


9% 
7% 
9% 


Maintenance 

Parts Sales 

Tie Down /Rental 


80% 
78% 
78% 


14% 
14% 
10% 


20% 
22% 
22% 


8% 

8% 

10% 



Chart prepared by the FBO Resource Group. Inc. for the Nctioncd Air Transportation Association. 



2484 



CHANGE IN 1991 SALES VERSUS 1990 
FOR MAJOR PROFIT CENTERS BY REGION 

The chart below lllastrates the percentage of respondents reporting increases 

and decreases In sales for the specified profit center by FAA region. The chart indicates 

changes based on 1990 sales performance as compared with 1991. 

FLIGHT OPERATIONS 





Charter 




Flight Instruction 




% Reporting 




% Reporting 


Region 


Increases Decreases 


Increases 


Decreases 


NaUonwlde (USA) 


42% 


58% 


58% 


42% 


New England 


80% 


20% 


60% 


40% 


Eastern 


35% 


65% 


85% 


15% 


Southern 


24% 


76% 


38% 


62% 


Great Lakes 


44% 


56% 


67% 


33% 


Central 


44% 


56% 


60% 


40% 


South West 


14% 


86% 


80% 


20% 


Western 


43% 


57% 


29% 


71% 


North West Mtn. 


46% 


54% 


75% 


25% 




Maintenance 


k 


Aircraft Rental 




% Reporting 




% 


Reporting 


Region 


Increases Decreases 


Increases 


I Decreases 


Nationwide (USA) 


51% 


49% 


49% 


51% 


NewEngland 


25% 


75% 


60% 


40% 


Eastern 


54% 


46% 


80% 


20% 


Southern 


49% 


51% 


23% 


77% 


Great Lakes 


64% 


36% 


61% 


39% 


Central 


55% 


45% 


60% 


40% 


South West 


29% 


71% 


50% 


50% 


Western 


65% 


35% 


23% 


77% 


North West Mtn. 


53% 


47% 


67% 


33% 






FUEL SALES 






Jet Fuel 






Avgas 




% Reportlnj 


i 


% 


Reporting 


Region 


Increases Decreases 


Increases Decreases 


NaUonwlde (USA) 


44% 


56% 


38% 


62% 


New England 


50% 


50% 


0% 


100% 


Eastern 


75% 


25% 


67% 


33% 


Southern 


41% 


59% 


41% 


59% 


Great Lakes 


36% 


64% 


28% 


72% 


Central 


30% 


70% 


36% 


64% 


South West 


14% 


86% 


0% 


100% 


Western 


46% 


54% 


50% 


50% 


North West Mtn. 


61% 


39% 


33% 


67% 



Chart prepared by the FBO Resource Group, Inc. for the National Air Transportation Associction. 



2485 




§ § g 

b t t 

u u u 

^ fe fe 

u u u 



s 






»-) 






t> 






CO 






g 






p^ 






M 






H 






» 






:§ 


§ 




o 


p4 










1 

CO 


o 


Q 
U 

u 


p 


o 


U 


p 


s 


z 


5 


CO 




d 


•^ 




o 


s 




0) 


F^ 








Q 

o 
u 

Q 




^13 



la 



1^ 



sssssssssssssssss 



■^2 



z 
o 

U.H 
(/) 

z 




8 S 9 §} 

OuU(tUUZH<OU 



e 
o 

1 

I 

c 
o 

t 

S. 



I. 
I 

o 

I 



-a, 

ci 

3 
O 



4) 

3 

o 

s 

■s 

3) 



a; 

g 



2486 



NATA REPORTS INDUSTRY OPTIMISM DESPITE ECONOMIC 
DOWNTURN 

According to the NATA Hndustry Barometer" Survey, which was conducted by the FBO 
Resource Group. Inc. In the first quarter of 1992 on l>ehalf of NATA. the General Aviation 
service industry continued to face a multitude of operational and economic challenges in 1991. 

However, based on the survey results, the Industry continues to maintain its optimism as three 
(3) out of four (4) respondents expect to be profitable in 1992. 

Predicated upon analysis of the survey results. It was clear that the Gulf War had an adverse 
Impact on industry perfonnance. Even today. In many markets, sales remain below pre-war 
levels. It was also apparent from the siu^ey results that the continued uncertainty and 
downturn of the national economy had a significant affect on the industry as the impact of an 
eighteen (18) month long recession and a stagnant economy continued to be felt across the 
country. 

While Member companies In some regions reported Improved sales and profits, others reported 
declines. As in the past for compilation purposes, data was grouped geographically according 
to established FAA Regional boundaries. Regional data was then consolidated to determine 
national averages. 

In addition to looking ahead to 1992, Members were asked to evaluate their company's 1991 
perfonnance and to comment on current business conditions and the challenges they face. 
Approximately eighteen percent (18%) of the NATA Membership completed and returned the 
survey questionnaire. A discussion of the responses In several key areas follows. 

PROFrTABELITY 

Over fifty percent (50%) of the respondents in six (6) regions including the Northeast. East, 
Great Lakes, Central West and Northwest reported a net profit. Nearly eight (8) out of tf n (10) 
respondents in the Central region reported a net profit in 1991 as opposed to only one (1) out of 
(3) respondents in the Southwest region. 

On a nationwide basis, approximately fifty-seven (57%) of the respondents reported a net profit 
which is consistent with previous years' survey results. 

Respondent's reporting a net profit of one percent (IV.) to five percent (5%) increased; however, 
the percentage of companies reporting profits in the range of six percent (6%) to ten percent 
(10%) declined as did the number of companies indicating profits In excess of ten percent (10%). 
Overall, the percentage of Member companies reporting a net profit in 1991 declined by nine 
percent (9%). from sixty-six percent (66%) in 1990 to fifty-seven percent (57%) in 1991. 

REVENUES 

In 1991, approximately fifty-eight percent (58%) of the respondents had an increase In flight 
Instruction revenues. Aircraft maintenance and aircraft rental sales were flat Air charter, 
aircraft sales. Jet Fuel and Avgas revenues all declined. New aircraft sales were Impacted the 
most as seventy-nine percent (79%) of respondents reported a decrease in this category. In 
addition, sixty-two (62%) of respondents indicated a decrease In Avgas sales. 

Approximately seventy-five percent (75%) of respondents expect revenues to Increase in 1992. 
Only eighteen percent (18%) expect decreases and seven percent (7%) expect no change. 

INDUSTRY CHALLENGES 

Overall, respondents were concerned most about the health of the general economy which was 
followed closely by federal, state, and local rules and regulations (especially those pertaining 
to undergroimd storage tanks). In addition, respondents were particularly concerned about 
fuel discounting and predatory pricing practices which tend to intensify in difficult economic 
times. 

A number of other significcmt factors were cited by NATA Member companies including 
product liability costs, aircraft parts availability /cost, and the ten percent (10%) aircraft 
luxury tax. 

LOOKING AHEAD TO 1992 

Member expectations for improvement in 1992 are high. As indicated previously, seventv-flve 
percent 175%) of the survey respon de nts expect to achieve a net profit in 1992 . Moreover. 
Member companies expect Increased sales with the greatest potential for growth being in the 
area of flight instruction and aircraft maintenance as approximately eight percent (80%) of the 
respondents anticipate increased sales in each of these areas. 

Overall, the majority of Member companies remain optimistic despite the Indnstry's 
lackluster 1991 performance. 

For additional information regarding the NATA "Industry Barometer" Survey, please contact 
the FBO Resource Group, Inc. at (303) 799-1900 or the NATA at (703) 845-9000, 



2487 



ATTAaHEKT B 



DUATS GPS NOTAM SERVICE 




2488 

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF RAILROAD PASSENGERS 
STATEMENT OF ROSS CAPON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

Thank you for this opportunity to present the views of our 
non-profit organization. 

We have appreciated this committee's support of Amtrak and 
mass transit and look forward to renewed progress as we work with 
the first president — at least in my lifetime — to have included a 
concern for improved rail passenger service as a prominent 
element in his campaigning. 

I. BEST USE OF EXISTING RESOURCES 

Mr. Chairman, we appreciate the critical role you have played 
in keeping Amtrak and the Northeast Corridor Improvement Project 
"on track" in recent years. Obviously, we strongly support the 
Amtrak and NECIP budget requests Amtrak submitted and we 
appreciate the positive role the administration has played in 
current efforts to include Amtrak in the FY '93 supplemental 
appropriation. 

With respect to "high speed rail," we are generally pleased 
with the administration's legislative proposal and with the 
request for $96 million in FY '94 funds for a corridor assistance 
program. That amount is a healthy 69% of the administration's 
$140 million request for FY '94 "high speed" funds. We think the 
corridor improvement program is by far the most important part of 
the high speed initiative. Overall, the largest possible 
proportion of the President's five-year, $1.3 billion "magnetic 
levitation and high-speed rail" program should go to immediately 
useful rail improvements. 

In that regard, our members enthusiastically support Amtrak 's 
plan to include in its procurement for the Northeast Corridor 
high-speed trainsets the development of a dualpower system that 
could be substituted for the electric locomotive when these 
trains are used on non-electrified rail lines. We think solid 
progress on such lines will be good for high speed rail both on 
and off the Northeast Corridor. 

The proposed corridor assistance program, along with ISTEA 
Section 1010, help move intercity passenger rail towards the 
level playing field that would have been provided had Congress 
enacted the Senate-passed language making passenger rail eligible 
for ISTEA Surface Transportation Program funding. 

II. ADEQUATE FUNDING FOR AMTRAK 

Although we support President Clinton's "A Vision for Change," 
recognizing it is worlds ahead of what previous administrations 
have produced, we were disappointed that this does not include 
increased funding for Amtrak, in contrast with proposals to 
increase spending on the energy-intensive road and air modes. 

Meanwhile, Amtrak struggles along short of cash and with 32% 
of its rolling stock past recommended heavy overhaul dates. 
Amtrak is generally unable to provide additional equipment for 
new services that states would like to help fund and in some 
instances lacks adequate equipment for existing services. 

Many people have cried for "full funding of ISTEA." Not 
surprisingly, however, our top priority is full funding of the 
Amtrak Authorization fully funded. Failing that, we would 



2489 



prefer — for example — 95% funding of both laws rather than 100% 
funding of ISTEA and 85% funding of Amtrak. Or, to be more 
precise, increasing highway spending 13% — instead of the 14% 
President Clinton proposed — would free up $143 million, enough 
for a 16% increase in Amtrak funding. 

Finally, as supporters of the concept of earmarking for Amtrak 
one penny of the deficit-reduction 2.5 cents, we were 
disappointed to hear the administration wants to switch those 
funds to the Highway Trust Fund. We suggest consideration of a 
compromise under which this money is earmarked for energy- 
efficient and environmentally-sound transportation solutions at 
the discretion of the appropriations commitees, with eligibility 
extending to all modes including intercity passenger rail. 

III. REMOVING THE ANTI-RAIL BIAS 

From top to bottom, our decisionmakers have a long way to go 
before rail gets the equitable treatment it deserves. A case in 
point is the fate of bonds for an Atlanta intermodal terminal in 
the state legislature in March. 

In the face of hard work by our members and the Atlanta 
Chamber of Commerce and strong support from the media, the state 
legislature failed to come through with $13.2 million in bonds 
that would have unlocked $120 million in federal funds. The 
Atlanta Constitution accused Transportation Commissioner Wayne 
Shackelford of being "more concerned with covering North Georgia 
with asphalt," a reference to the "Outer Perimeter," a 
controversial proposed highway whose chances of construction 
Georgia DOT seeks to enhance through inclusion in the National 
Highway System. 

Subsequently, the City of Atlanta seems to have resurrected 
the project. Indeed, Amtrak Chairman W. Graham Claytor Jr. on 
May 26 told his board the project "is moving right along." 

In North Carolina, relevant state and local officials — plus 
FHWA's Raleigh office and the Atlanta regional office — agreed to 
use $9.6 million in ISTEA Surface Transportation Program funds to 
facilitate improved Raleigh-Charlotte rail passenger service — but 
FHWA/Washington rejected all but $700,000 (for changing grade- 
crossing signal circuits) . The Raleigh-Ch£rlotte line has seven 
urbanized areas in 170 miles and parallels an Interstate highway 
with congestion problems. (See Attachment I, Mar. 11 J of C .) 

Then Senators Breaux and Boren, in their alternative stimulus 
proposal, called highways and airports "programs to be funded 
immediately" and Amtrak to be funded "after reconciliation bill," 
even though a big chunk of the Amtrak money would have been used 
to recall furloughed Beech Grove workers and help prevent further 
deterioration of Amtrak service quality. 

IV. BOSTON RAIL LINK 

While Boston is constructing the Central Artery Project — the 
depression of a freeway that links North Station and South 
Station — we believe and most Massachusetts officials now agree a 
rail link between those stations should also be built. This 
would dramatically enhance the usefulness of existing and 
proposed trains serving Boston, including regional commuter rail, 
Boston-New York high speed and Boston-Portland. We urge this 
committee to support rail link efforts. 



2490 



AMTRAK PRICING 



After much correspondence with 
pricing is not maximizing revenue 
off-peak discounting on most long 
special non-refundable "All Aboar 
November 13. In January and Febr 
fares should have been restored, 
Amtrak revenues (February airline 
We note with approval that in ear 
implemented some special new disc 



Amtrak, we s 
s, particular 
-distance rou 
d" fares expi 
uary, when we 
airline reven 
s rose 2.5%, 
ly May Amtrak 
ounts aimed a 



till think their 
ly due to lack of 
tes. Amtrak's 
red for sale 

believe those 
ues outperformed 
Amtrak declined ) . 

finally 
t these markets. 



Attachment I 
[From the Journal of Commerce, March 11, 1993] 

NC Rejection Dramatizes Lack of US Rail Funds 



By RIP WATSON 

JoufntI of Conim«rca SlaH 

A rebuffed funding application 
from the state of North Carolina to 
improve train service in a con- 
gested, high-profile corridor is spot- 
lighting the lack of federal dollars to 
back the Clinton administration's 
oft-repeated pledge to boost inter- 
city passenger rail projects. 

The issue surfaced after the 
state's bid for |9.6 million from the 
Federal Highway Administration 
was derailed because the Depart- 
ment of Transportation unit found 
that the application did not meet its 
funding criteria. 

North Carolina was seeking the 
funds to improve inter-city passen- 
ger service on a rail line b«tween 
Charlotte and Raleigh. The Federal 
Railroad Administration picked the 
corridor as a likely target for future 
high-speed rail service. 

The application requested fund- 
ing to improve signals, track align- 
ment, train-switching capability and 
rail-highway crossings 

The state seeks to develop the 
rail route because of growing high- 
way congestion on 1-85 and 1-40, 
which parallels the route where Am- 
trak offers passenger service. 

David King, deputy secretary of 
the state Department of Transporta- 
tion, said the FflWA decision "was 
made narrowly, based on a strict 
interpretation of the words without 
reference to the spirit of the Inter- 
modal Surface Transportation Effi- 
ciency Act (Istea)." 

"We've seen (DOT) Secretary 
(Fedcrico) Pena quoted as saying 
that he did not understand why ade- 
quate inter-city rail program fund- 
ing was excluded from Istea," Mr. 
King noted. "It doesn't make sense 
to us, either. 

"Clearly, the policy of the admin- 



istration seems to be very support- 
ive of high-speed rail, so it certainly 
seems sensible to us to have the new 
administrator (of FHWA) Uke an- 
other look at this," he added. 

The FHWA has no administrator, 
but Mr. Pena has said he expects to 
announce nominees for DOT modal 
administrators this week. He has In- 
dicated that he will be seeking ad- 
ministrators with a broad, 
multi-modal perspective. 

Programs such as North Caroli- 
na's might qualify for funding if the 
DOT'S proposals to spend $936 mil- 
lion on high-speed rail projects over 
four years become law as part of 
the Clinton administration's budget 
package. 

The state turned to the FHWA 
and the Surface Transportation Pro- 
gram portion of the Transportation 
Funding Act because the only exist- 
ing funding for inter-city or 
high-speed rail projects is $5 million 
in the Federal Railroad Administra- 
tion's budget. There are 15 applica- 
tions for that funding, FRA officials 
said. 

North Carolina, working with 
Amtrak, plans to launch an intra- 
state rail service this summer 
known as the Piedmont. The train is 
meant to complement Amtrak serv- 
ice between Charlotte and Raleigh. 

Specifically, North Carolina was 
seeking $6 million to finance signal 
improvements on Norfolk Soutbern's 
rail line between Charlotte and Ra- 
leigh that would have allowed train 
speeds to increase from 59 to 79 
mph. 

The sUte DOT sought $13 million 
for track reconstruction to increase 
elevation of curves, which also al- 
lows for faster operation. 

The balance of the funds were to 
go for new track at Charlotte and 
Raleigh to turn trains and improve- 
ments to electronic circuits that ac- 



tivate warning devices at 
rail-highway crossings. The FHWA 
did say the $300,000 for highway 
crossing improvements was eligible 
for funding. 

The highway agency nixed the 
program because it determined that 
the requests were directly related to 
construction of a rail line. Its policy 
statements say the funds North Car- 
olina was seeking from a specific 
portion of Istea can be used only for 
rail projects such as road realign- 
ments, bridge improvements to cre- 
ate higher clearances, drainage, 
lighting, signage and crossing pro- 
jects. 

The FHWA noted in its policy 
statements that one part of the Istea 
stresses the need for an intercon- 
nected, intermodal transportation 
system, but does not provide funding 
authority or eligibility criteria for 
programs to create such a system. 

Mr. King said the state also con- 
sidered going to the Federal Transit 
Administration for funds, but deter- 
mined that that division of the DOT 
could not fund the program because 
it was not a commuter rail project. 

"I'm not sure I fault their reason- 
ing," he said. "I fault their outcome. 
It makes no sense to treat a project 
like this as commuter rail in order 
for it to be eligible for funding." 

The state feels strongly enough 
about the Piedmont service that it 
acquired its own railroad cars and 
locomotives to operate a westbound 
morning service from Raleigh and 
an eastbound evening return trip 
from Charlotte that mirrors the ex- 
isting Amtrak service. 

Cliff Black, an Amtrak spokes- 
man, said the federally owned pas- 
senger railroad has told states that 
in most cases they would have to 
furnish new equipment because Am- 
trak doesn't have enough equipment 
to support the new services that 
states seek. 



2491 



NATIONAL ASSOQATION OF STATE BOATING LAW 
ADMINISTRATORS 

STATEMENT OF MAJ. RANDOLPH W. DILL, BOATING LAW 
ADMINISTRATOR, CONNECTICUT 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

Attached is a copy of statement from the National Association of State Boating Law 
Administrators (NASBLA) for your Subcommittee's consideration during hearings on the Coast 
Guard's fiscal 1994 appropriation. Should you call outside witnesses, we would welcome the 
opportunity to make remarks, otherwise we request that this statement be made a part of the 
Subcommittee hearing record. 

Our Association feels very strongly that the trust fiinds made available to the States from the 
Boating.Safety account of the Aquatic Resources Trust Fund (Wallop-Breaux) has made a major 
contribution to safe and enjoyable boating for all who use our Nations waterways. The fruits of 
our labor is in the reduction of boating fatalities over the years, and a safer environment for all 
recreational boating interests. However, the recent tragedy in Florida involving two Gevcland 
Indians baseball payers killed in a boating accident, is an unfortunate reminder that our work is 
not done. 

The Boat Safety Account Trust Fund as you know, is derived from the tax boaters pay on their 
gasoline used in motorboats, not from general fund revenues. We think its important to 
remember that any funds from this trust fund, not appropriated to the Boat Safety Account, 
automatically roll over to the Sport Fish Account, where unfortunately, it can no longer be spent 
on boating safety programs. We think that it is especially noteworthy that the American League 
of Anglers and Boaters went on record in their letter to you, dated March 8, 1993, with 
signatures from 20 coalition member organizations asking for full funding of $70 million as 
authorized for the Boat Safety Account for fiscal 1S>94. 

In 1991 I was privileged along with George Stewart, our Director, Government Affairs, to visit 
with you and Peter Rogoff, of your staff, following the presentation to you of our Association 
Legislative Award. We left with a lasting impression of your knowledge and commitment to 
boating safety. We want you to know that our membership very much recognizes and 
appreciates your efforts on our behalf over the years. 

Our Association has high praise for the Coast Guard in their Administration of these trust funds 
to the States. We feel that this is a model state-federal partnership and one that you and the 
Congress can be proud of. 

We appreciate your continuing support, and again this year ask for your consideration of full 
funding ($70 million) as authorized for the Boat Safety Account of the Aquatic Resources Trust 
Fund (Wallop-Breaux). 

I am Major Randolph W. Dill, Boating Law Administrator, State of Connecticut and Past 
President of the National Association of State Boating Law Administrators. Our Association is 
pleased to provide input into your hearing regarding the Boating Safety Trust Fund Appropriation 
for fiscal 1994. 

The National Association of State Boating Law Administrators (NASBLA) is a 
professional association consisting of state, commonwealth and provincial officials having 
responsibility for administering and/or enforcing state boating laws. 



2492 



My testimony today will focus on the Aquatic Resources Trust Fund and more specific 
the Boat Safety Account of this fund. 

The Boat Safety Account, as you arc aware, is funded with monies from the Aquatic 
Resources Trust Fund (popularly known as the Wailop-Breaux Fund). Monies in this trust fund 
come from gasoline taxes paid by boaters. Under current law $70 million is authorized to be 
transferred to the Boat Safety Account. Half of the funds are used by the Coast Guard and half 
gees to the states in the form of matching grants to fund boating safety programs. These funds 
are very much needed to augment the state funds and have improved our credibility and 
effectiveness in the budgetary competition within state legislatures. 

Our Association feels this is indeed a model State-Federal partnership and is in keeping 

with the user fee concept (ie) user pays-user benefits. We are very proud of the use of these 

funds and believe we are meeting the high expectations of the Congress. Our Association has 

prepared a booklet which details state by state projects funneied through these grants. We have 

made copies of this publication available to each member of this Subcommittee. 

Mr. Chairman, our Association feels very strongly that the establishment of the Boat 

Safety Account of the Aquatic Resources Trust Fund (Wailop-Breaux) was a milestone in 

Federal legislation, directing support to "Our Boating Public" with the tax this group pays on 

marine fuel used in motorboats. In previous testimony, we have applauded this Subcommittee 

and the Congress on their farsighted approach to the needs of this user group, without placing 

a burden of the general taxpayer. We are here again today to reiterate our support of this 

important law. 

We feel the state program, to date, is a shining example of an ideal Statc/Fcdcral 
partnership. We will continue to strive for more innovative uses of these funds to better educate 
the boater and further reduce boating fatalities. However, we cannot over emphasize that stability 
is needed if the true fruits of full funding are to be realized. We, therefore, urgently ask this 
Subcommittee to provide full funding of $70 million as authorized for the Boat Safety Account 
for fiscal 1994. 

Allowing the States to recoup the Federal marine fuel tax that boaters pay on marine fuel 
used in motorboats is a prime example of the user fees helping the user. With these funds the 



2493 

States have willingly assumed a major share of what is logically and statutorily a joint 

responsibility. The States have demonstrated credibility and consistency, and have provided 

necessary resources to reach the boating public. The States have concentrated on establishing 

an administrative infrastructure, purchasing equipment and promoting the education and 

enforcement techniques which stimulate increased boating awareness, and help to decrease 

fatalities. We believe that state programs provide the most cost effective service to the boating 

public. To reduce funding to the states would shift safety services back to the Federal 
government resulting in inordinate costs to the taxpayers. 

In all previous testimony before this Subcommittee we have spoken with pride of the 
excellent State-Federal partnership we share with the U.S. Coast Guard. On the front cover of 
our publication "Boating Safety Dollars At Work" we show a joint operation involving a Coast 
Guard helicopter and a state patrol boat, which further radiates the "State-Federal partnership". 
We truly believe that we compliment each other in our joint efforts to make safe and enjoyable 
boating a reality on our nation's waterways. 

In our 1992 publication "Boating Safety Dollars At Work", we published a message from 
Admiral J.W. Kime, Commandant U.S. Coast Guard. Attached to my testimony is a copy of this 
message for the Subcommittee's perusal. The Admiral's letter will further attest to the excellent 
cooperative effort that exists between the States and the Coast Guard in the area of boating 
safety. Needless to say we arc very pleased with the Admiral's statement, "The financial 
assistance provided to the States from the Boat Safety Account of the Aquatic Resources Trust 
Fund has, of course, contributed significantly to the ability of the States to accept the additional 
responsibility. This is truly an outstanding example of the ability of government at all levels to 
woric together for the benefit of the public we serve, and I am fiilly convinced that this 
cooperative effort has directly resulted in safer boating for millions of Americans." 

In summary, Mr. Chairman, our Association is pleased to offer our comments on the 
Coast Guard's Appropriation for fiscal 1994. We appreciate this Subcommittee's continuing 
support and again ask for your consideration of full funding of $70 million as authorized for 
fiscal 1994. 

Thank You 



2494 



NATIONAL EASTER SEAL SOCIETY 

STATEMENT OF FRANK PINTER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 
MARYLAND CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING 

Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on behalf of the National 
Easter Seal Society regarding Project ACTION and FY94 funding to Increase mass 
transit accessibility. I am Frank Pinter, Executive Director of the Maryland Center 
for Independent Living. 

Congress created Project ACTION (Accessible Community Transportation In 
Our Nation) In 1987 to enhance cooperation between transit providers and the 
disability community. The NaUonal Easter Seal Society administers Project ACTION, 
under a cooperative agreement with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). In 
enacUng the 1991 Intermodal Surface TransportaUon Efficiency Act (ISTEA). 
Congress recognized Project ACTION'S Important contributions by authorizing some 
$2,000,000 per year from the FTA national programs research budget for Project 
ACTION type acUvltles and strongly endorsing the efforts of Project ACTION via 
report language. 

In creating Project ACTION, Congress expressed five priorities. First, to 
identify people with disabilities and their transit needs. Second, to develop outreach 
and marketing efforts. Third, to develop training programs for transit personnel. 
Fourth, to develop training programs for transit users with disabilities. And fifth, to 
apply technology to eliminate barriers to transportation and accessibility. To fulfill 
this mission. Project ACTION has engaged in ground breaking research, 
demonstration projects and technical assistance to Improve access to public 
transportation for people with disabilities. 

Project ACTION'S current activities focus on Important ADA implementation 
issues and address a broad spectrum of accessible transportation needs for people 
with disabilities. Current projects Include the training of people with disabilities on 
their rights and responsibilities under the ADA and on the use of accessible fixed 
route services. Project ACTION is training school age youngsters, high school 



2495 



graduates, and older Americans on the use of accessible fixed route services with 
particular attention given to those who are transitioning off of paratranslt. 

Skyrocketing paratranslt costs are a major financial concern for the transit 
Industry and for taxpayers. Project ACTION has and will continue to make a 
difference here. In Baltimore, the success we have had at reducing reliance on costly 
paratranslt Is Just one example of the many returns Congress Is getting on Its 
investment In Project ACTION. The annual cost of providing paratranslt services for 
persons travelling to and from work each day can run from 5 to 10 thousand dollars. 
Because of Project ACTION'S activities In Baltimore, accessible tlxed route rldershlp 
Increased by 50 passengers. Project ACTION'S success in Baltimore at getting 
passengers onto fLxed routes has saved transit operators 5 times the cost of our 
grant in one year alone. 

Other Project ACTION projects are reporting similar successes in Increasing 
rldershlp on accessible fixed route systems. In Texas, 81 percent of those persons 
trained In a Project ACTION demonstration project are currently using fixed route 
bus systems as their primary means of transportation. While reducing skyrocketing 
paratranslt costs is vital, increasing fixed route rldershlp yields more than Just 
financial benefits. Shortiy after Project ACTION formally commenced. Congress 
made a major contribution to the lives of people with disabilities by enacting the 
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Since the enactment of the ADA. Project 
ACTION has been at the forefront of implementation activities. Riding fixed route 
systems provides people with disabilities with the independence and access to 
opportunity that the ADA envisioned. As executive director of an Independent living 
center. I can tell you firsthand that without access to transportation we cannot 
achieve the ADA's promise of full participation in society for people with disabilities. 

Since the passage of the ADA. demand for Project ACTION assistance has 
grown substantially. Some critics of the ADA have expressed fears that the ADA 
would encourage protracted and cosUy litigation. Project ACTION'S educational 
focus and success at bringing people to the table to resolve disputes has avoided 



2496 



costly legal battles that could undermine public support for the ADA. Project 
ACTION continues to play a vital role In encouraging parties to mediate before they 
litigate. Project ACTION'S continuing efforts can ensure that we focus our limited 
energies and financial resources on advancing the best Interests of people with 
disabilities and not on costly llUgatlon. In FY94. Project ACTION will focus on "high 
Impact" projects to provide answers to the questions that transit systems throughout 
the nation are facing as they work toward ADA compliance. 

Project ACTION is expanding the role of the National Institute for Accessible 
Transportation (NIAT) to facilitate wide dissemination of Information about Project 
ACTION and the ADA. This Institute, begun with FY92 Project ACTION funds, 
ensures that knowledge about ADA requirements gets into the hands of those who 
need It by promoting the replication of Innovatjvf;. vccesj* ole programs and 
technologies In a variety of local settings. Project ACilON will also be conducting 
a national conference highlighting research results. ADA implementation, and the 
national state of accessibility. 

To carry out these proposed activities, the National Easter Seal Society 
recommends that $2,000,000 be allocated to Project ACTION for FY94. This Is 
consistent with the funding authorized in the ISTEA and is the same level supported 
by Congress in the current fiscal year. Project ACTION Is a credible, cost-efi'ectlve 
and creative means of engaging disability and transit Interests in improving access 
to transportation for people with disabilities. 

Project ACTION would not be possible without the leadership of the House 
and Senate Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee chairs, members and staff. 
We are deeply grateful for this and look forward to continued collaboration. 



2497 



RESERVE OFHCERS ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES 

STATEMENT OF COMDR. WILLIAM E. LEGG, USNR (RET.), 
DIRECTOR, NAVAL AFFAIRS 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: 

It is my pleasure to report to this committee concerning 
United States Coast Guard Appropriations. 

The Reserve Officers Association has consistently supported 
adequate resource allocations for the United States Coast Guard. 
Over the past several years it has required extraordinary actions 
by the Congress to provide the necessary authorization and funding 
for this unique armed force. 

The multi-mission nature of the Coast Guard and the 
professionalism and flexibility of its personnel have been both a 
curse and a blessing. The ability of the Coast Guard to do so much 
with so little has encouraged some to continue to increase taskings 
without allocating all the needed resources. 

COAST GUARD BUDGET REQUEST 

The President's Budget Request includes a relatively modest 
$3,812 billion for the Coast Guard. Although this level is about 
four percent more than the funding provided for Fiscal Year 1993, 
all but slightly more than one percent of this growth is to 
accommodate the impact of inflation. However, even this moderate 
rate of "real" growth is more apparent than real because of the 
unusually low level of funding in the Acquisition, Construction, 
and Improvements (AC&I) appropriation in Fiscal Year 1993. 

Therefore, once again the overall Coast Guard budget request 
reflects one of the "best buys" for the American taxpayer and 
deserves full and positive consideration by the Congress. 



76-693 O - 94 - 3 



2498 



SELECTED RESERVE STRENGTH 

However, there is at least one area where the budget request 
does not take advantage of the "best buy" philosophy — the Coast 
Guard Reserve. The President's Budget Request includes plans for 
a dramatic decline in the size of the Coast Guard Reserve. If 
approved, the Coast Guard Reserve would be reduced by almost 25 
percent in one year to a new low of only 8,000 personnel at the end 
of Fiscal Year 1994. 

As we noted last year when we objected to the cut to 10,850 
proposed for Fiscal Year 1993, the Coast Guard Reserve had not been 
at a strength level less than 11,000 personnel since the early 
stages of the build up for the Viet Nam conflict. We are now facing 
a cut that would be of such magnitude that our records, which only 
go back to the 1950 's, indicate that the Coast Guard Reserve has 
not been as small as 8,000 personnel since the earliest days of its 
inception more than 50 years ago. 

Over the past several years, the Coast Guard Reserve has 
consistently faced the problem of insufficient funds. The Congress 
provided authorization levels that would have permitted some 
growth. In fact, the Coast Guard Reserve has been authorized an end 
strength of 15,150 each year since Fiscal Year 1990, but the funded 
level has steadily declined from the "high" of 12,000 in Fiscal 
Year 1990 to what is now planned to be an interim low of 10,510 for 
Fiscal Year 1993. 

The difficulty in securing the necessary funding over the past 
several years has had its roots in the inability of the Coast Guard 
to identify credible mobilization manpower requirements and then 
obtain Department of Transportation approval of a plan to grow the 
Reserve Force required by the Coast Guard to meet the majority of 
these documented requirements. 



2499 



Another source of the problem of obtaining necessary funding 
is poor timing. The Administration's plan to increase the size of 
the Coast Guard Reserve to 95 percent of its mobilization 
requirements did not receive final approval until DoD was starting 
to plan reductions in its force structure, including the Reserve 
Components, As we stated last year, the Coast Guard Reserve "missed 
the 'ride up, ' but [is] certainly being programmed to 'ride down. •" 

The shifting of funding sources for the Reserve Training 
appropriation from the historical sole dependence on the 
Transportation Appropriations Bill to split jurisdiction between 
Defense (Function 50) and Transportation (Function 400) for Fiscal 
Years 1992 and 1993 also adversely affected attaining adequate 
funding for the Coast Guard Reserve. In fact, there was not 
unanimous agreement either between the two houses of Congress or 
the Administration on whether dual funding should be used and, if 
so, to what degree. The result was that although the authorized 
personnel strength exceeded 15,000 for both these years, the 
funding provided would only support 11,500 and 10,510, 
respectively. 

The request for $64 million in the Reserve Training (RT) 
appropriation for Fiscal Year 1994 is $9 million less than the 
level appropriated for Fiscal Year 1993 and is approximately $11.2 
million less than is needed to maintain even 10,000 Selected 
Reservists. 

The rationale for this dramatic reduction was given by 
Secretary Pefia as, "This downsized force is based on the Coast 
Guard's review of its defense-related mobilization requirements." 

It appears that the Coast Guard has forgotten that its Reserve 
also has the demonstrated capability to assist in the performance 
of the Coast Guard's peacetime missions. The Coast Guard Reserve 



2500 



routinely provides significant support to the active force through 
augmentation training and such innovative programs as "Summer 
Stock" where Reservists assume the full responsibility for specific 
search and rescue operations on the Great Lakes that are not 
operated on a year-round basis. Coast Guard Reservists also 
prrjvided meaningful support in response to the Exxon-Valdez 
incident, the San Francisco earthquake, and hurricane Andrew, to 
name but a few of the occasions when individual Reservists have 
volunteered and performed essential services. Naturally, a 
dramatically smaller Selected Reserve will result in a 
proportionally smaller pool of personnel available to meet future 
contingencies . 

The failure to take advantage of the efficiencies available 
through expanded use of the Reserve Component is especially 
puzzling in light of the past performance of Coast Guard Reservists 
and the knowledge that the Coast Guard Reserve has unique 
capabilities in law enforcement and is subject to involuntary 
recall by the Secretary of Transportation to respond to domestic 
contingencies . 

ROA has been at the forefront of those calling for updated 
statements of manpower requirements and the development of new 
force-mix alternatives for each of the armed forces. The Coast 
Guard was not included in the independent analysis performed for 
DoD by the RAND corporation. Liaison with Coast Guard headquarters 
confirmed that the Commandant's staff is embarked on its own 
analysis of Coast Guard Reserve personnel requirements. But, as 
recently as two months ago, we were assured that there was no 
possibility that this task would be completed prior to this July. 
This fact is consistent with other information that categorizes the 
8,000 figure as "preliminary" and a "best estimate." It certainly 
appears that the Coast Guard Reserve is programmed for an abrupt 



2501 



cut to a strength level that is still not based on firm 
requirements. 

Even if these new "requirements" are subsequently validated, 
it is not logical to subject Coast Guard Reserve personnel to such 
a drastic reduction in force size in a single year, particularly 
in light of the fact that they are not covered by the Reserve 
Transition Benefits program enacted by Congress last year for DoD 
Reserve Components. 

Indications are that the Coast Guard Reserve is already 
planning on reducing strength to approximately 10,000 by the end 
of this fiscal year by stopping new accessions. Next year, the 
involuntary transfer of personnel out of pay status and to the 
Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) will also be required to meet the 
projected 8,000 level. 

FULL TIME SUPPORT PERSONNEL 
RCA is also concerned over the projected cut in what is 
already the lowest level of full-time active-duty military support 
personnel of any Reserve Component. The President's Budget Request 
would lower the number of such personnel from 570 to 482. This 15 
percent reduction seems inappropriate for what is acknowledged to 
be, by far, the lowest ratio of Selected Reserve to active-duty 
support personnel in any Reserve Component. 

ROA has objected to such reductions on the basis that it is 
a prime example of counterproductive fiscal action. Improving the 
ratio of support personnel to Selected Reservists will increase 
readiness and efficiency by enabling Reservists to spend time 
training for their mission or assisting the active force instead 
of performing the many administrative support functions that are 
required today. Therefore, ROA recommends that the level of Full 
Time Support (FTS) personnel not be reduced in Fiscal Year 1994. 



2502 



SUMMARY 

In summary, the Reserve Officers Association supports funding 
the Coast Guard at least at the level requested in the President's 
Budget submission, $3,812 billion. In addition, ROA strongly 
recommends that the Coast Guard Reserve be authorized at least 
10,000 Selected Reserve personnel and 570 full-time active-duty 
support personnel and that $11.2 million be added to the Reserve 
Training appropriation to fund these increased personnel levels. 



2503 



INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS, REQUESTS BY CITIES AND STATES 

ADVANCED NAVIGATION AND POSITIONING CORP., 
HOOD RIVER, OR 

STATEMENT OF JOHN STOLTZ, PRESIDENT 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to offer outside 
witness testimony for the record. My name is John Stoltz and I am 
President of the Advanced Navigation and Positioning Corporation 
(ANPC) of Hood River, Oregon. We are experienced in the design and 
development of advanced electronic systems for navigation, 
positioning and tactical avionics, and have designed and prototyped 
the tactical avionics for the F-22 Advanced Tactical Fighter. In 
addition, we have a special interest in innovative high technology 
products designed specifically to improve the safety and 
utilization of aircraft in all-weather conditions at airports and 
heliports. 

The topic of my testimony is our Advanced Landing System 
(ALS) , a low cost ILS equivalent precision landing system. This 
system, developed privately by ANPC, can be installed at any 
airport and interfaces -ith standard avionics on-board virtually 
all IFR equipped aircraft now in service to generate navigation and 
control inputs sufficient to guide a pilot to Category 1 precision 
approach minimums. 

Last year, because this technology has broad applications for 
civilian, both general and commercial, as well as military aviation 
use, this Subcommittee included language recognizing our work with 
the Defense Department and ARPA, directing "the Federal Aviation 
Administration to work with the DoD to provide the necessary 
assistance to support the commercial viability of the ALS." I am 
pleased to report that process is underway, with especially helpful 
input provided by FAA officials from the Northwest Region. To 
sustain that interest and effort we seek your support and language 
in FY 1994 virtually identical to language included in the FY 1993 
committee report. 



2504 



You should also be aware that in addition to the interest 
expressed by the military, including OT&E personnel from the Marine 
Corps HMX-1 Squadron based at Quantico, VA, and Special Operations 
technical representatives, a variety of civilian Public Safety 
organizations, including emergency medical services and law 
enforcement agencies, have expressed serious interest in this 
system. This convergence of interest is based on a recognition of 
the unique capacity of the ALS to tailor service to the specific 
needs of critical but generally under supported segments of the 
aviation constituency. 

As you know, the Administration has placed a great deal of 
emphasis on fostering multi-use technologies. We believe that ALS 
represents an exciting new technology, which can significantly — 
and affordably — improve both specialized and general aviation 
operations and safety. 

In contrast to other ground-based, precision approach aids, 
the ALS equipment is easily installed and calibrated. It is not 
hindered by irregular terrain or obstructions. In fact, the 
equipment is designed to take advantage of local topography. As a 
consequence, ALS is amendable to temporary installations where a 
landing capability is needed at a remote site in a short amount of 
time. Finally and significantly, the system's software package 
provides a collateral capability for tracking and control of ground 
and air traffic and represents an affordable alternative in the 
search to develop a system to prevent runway incursions and support 
enhanced safety for approaches to parallel runways. 

Conference Report 102-1015, the report accompanying Public Law 
102-396, the FY 1993 Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 
provided $1 million to initiate DoD evaluations and applications 
for an ALS. It is our understanding that the Advanced Research 
Projects Agency (ARPA) intends to utilize these monies in the near 
future to test and evaluate the ALS system based on a preliminary 
technical appraisal already conducted by ARPA evaluators. 



2505 



In FY 1994, we are seeking a total of $1.75 through the 
Defense Department to operate and test a prototype production 
standard ALS system; conduct joint and multi-use demonstrations 
with military and civilian public safety representatives; and 
evaluate equipment, manufacturing and production issues, following 
on work initiated with ARPA and funded in FY 1993. 

Our objective is to work with the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA) to obtain certification for this technology 
and strengthen our relationship with the Defense Department and the 
Advanced Research Projects Agency. It is important that the FAA be 
aware of the work that we will be doing with these other agencies 
in FY 1993 and FY 1994. Therefore, language by the Subcommittee 
directing the FAA to continue working with and providing assistance 
to these agencies is vital. 

Mr. Chairman, I believe that the ALS will maximize air safety 
and the efficiency of military and civilian fixed wing and 
helicopter operations. This is an excellent project for the 
application of multi-use technology. 

Thank you for this opportunity to submit testimony. 



2506 



ATLANTA, GA 

STATEMENT OF THE METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT 

AUTHORITY [MARTA] 

NARTA FISCAL YEAR 1994 FEDERAL FUNDING REQUEST 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

For sixteen days In the summer of 1996, the attention of the world 
will be focused on the United States and Atlanta, Georgia. In 
excess of two million visitors will demand transportation services 
while attending the 1996 Centennial Olympic Games. The 
Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) must be there 
to meet that demand by providing coordinated, efficient, and 
reliable public transportation. It is a challenge, but it is one 
that we can meet with Congress' continuing assistance. 

Thanks to the past attention of Congress, much of the public 
transportation infrastructure needed to meet this challenge is 
already in place, but more needs to be done. MARTA plans to meet 
the demand for public transit using our rapid rail and our bus 
system. These two transit components will carry the spectators 
expected from around the world and the bulk of our regional 
commuters, whose numbers are expected to swell as the community 
seeks to reduce traffic congestion during the Games. These transit 
components are described below. 

System Description - Rail Coiponent 

The approved MARTA rail system consists of 60 miles of heavy rail 
lines, 45 stations and 33,000 parking spaces. Currently, there are 
35.9 miles of track in revenue service and 31 stations. An 
additional 10.2 miles and 5 stations are under development and are 
scheduled to open for passenger service between 1993 and 1996. 
This includes 7.1 miles of track and three stations on the North 



2507 



Line for which Congress has most recently appropriated Section 3 
funding . 

System Description - Bus Component 

MARTA's bus fleet consists of 698 buses operating on 150 routes and 
covering over 1,500 route miles. On a daily basis, MARTA buses 
travel 91,740 vehicle miles or total annual vehicle revenue miles 
of 25.7 million miles. MARTA experiences an average daily bus 
boarding of 223,000 patrons. 



Preparation for the Olynipics 

The design of the MARTA rail and bus system is conducive to 
providing excellent service to the majority of Olympic venues. An 
imaginary circle, three miles in diameter, drawn loosely around 
the MARTA Five Points Station is referred to as the Olympic Circle. 
Most of the Olympic activities will take place within this area. 
The MARTA transit system currently provides public transportation 
within the Olympic Circle to such proposed Olympic venues as the 
Olympic Stadium, Fulton County - City of Atlanta Stadium, Georgia 
Tech, Atlanta University, Civic Center and Georgia Dome-Omni-World 
Congress Center. However, the level of effort required to serve 
the demand arising from the Olympics will be unlike anything we 
have ever experienced. 

Our rail and bus systems will be challenged to operate at peak 
levels for much of the Olympic day. Our rail construction program 
continues to add to our service area. For instance, two stations 
and 3.1 miles of track will be completed on the East Line and 
opened later this year. These stations will add an additional 4400 
parking spaces and these easternmost portions of the system will 
provide excellent transition points to service the Olympic events 
scheduled for the Stone Mountain Memorial Park venues (tennis, 
cycling and rowing) and the equestrian events east of Atlanta. 



2508 



Further, efforts are being made to complete the North Line project 
through the Dunwoody Station by the 1996 Olympics. At present, 
this schedule is being closely monitored and discussed. The 
failure of the local sales tax to perform up to financial 
projections during this period of recession has caused the schedule 
for construction of the North Line to slip. Efforts are currently 
underway to see if the schedule can be recovered. Congress has 
appropriated $122.7 million for this project which represents 
sufficient federal funds to see the project through its initial 7.1 
miles and three stations (Buckhead, Medical Center and Dunwoody). 
If the schedule can be recovered, this rail construction will 
provide access to the Olympic venues from the densely populated 
and developed northern Atlanta corridor. 

The MARTA bus system must be made as reliable as possible to meet 
the demands that are expected to be placed upon that system by the 
Olympics. Older buses, many of which require especially high 
levels of maintenance and are not lift equipped, must be replaced 
if we are to be able to provide the service necessary for the 
Olympics. The buses to be replaced were manufactured between 1978 
and 1982. They exceed the minimum FTA replacement criteria of 12 
years or 500,000 miles of accumulated service. 

Fiscal Year 1994 Federal Funding Request 

MARTA respectfully requests the Appropriations Committees of the 
United States Congress to earmark $20.8 million in FT 1994 FTA 
Section 3 bus and bus related funds for 100 replacement buses and 
certain bus facility improvements to meet the demands on public 
transit necessitated by the 1996 Olympic Games. 

Of the requested $20.8 million in FT 1994 Section 3 bus funds, 
$17.6 million is required as the federal share to purchase 100 
replacement buses. The remaining $3.2 million is needed to upgrade 
bus facilities to comply with certain EPA requirements, renovate 



2509 



and add an engine rebuild area to another garage and expand a final 
garage to better accommodate the bus fleet. 

Although MARTA will be returning to request Congressional 
assistance to continue the North Line new start project beyond 
Dunwoody to North Springs, it was felt that the most pressing and 
immediate need to the whole transit system at this time is to make 
our bus fleet more reliable and more accessible as we invite the 
world to the United States and Atlanta in 1996. The justification, 
rationale and background supporting this request are set out in the 
following pages of this document. 

Facing the Olympic Challenge 

The 1996 Centennial Olympic Games will focus the attention of the 
world on the United States and Atlanta, Georgia. In excess of two 
million visitors will demand transportation services while 
attending the 1996 Centennial Olympic Games. It is estimated that 
an average of 361,000 people daily will be involved in the Olympics 
experience. The Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority 
(MARTA) must be there to meet that demand by providing coordinated, 
efficient, and reliable public transportation. It is a challenge, 
but it is one that we can meet with Congress' continuing 
assistance. 

Thanks to the past attention of Congress and early local commitment 
to transit, much of the public transportation infrastructure is 
already in place, but more needs to be done. MARTA will meet the 
demand for public transit using our rapid rail system and our bus 
system. These two transit components will carry the spectators 
expected from around the world and the bulk of our regional 
commuters, whose numbers are expected to swell as the community 
seeks to reduce traffic congestion during the Games. 



2510 



Following is an overview of the MARTA system and an update on our 
rail and bus transit components. Special attention is made to 
identify where we are in preparing for the transportation challenge 
of the 1996 Olympic Games. 

It should be noted that there are two transportation groups which 
must be served during any Olympics. The first is the "Olympic 
Family" which consists of the athletes, their attendants, coaches, 
referees and judges. International Olympic Committee members, staff 
and dignitaries. There are estimated to be more than 130,000 
Olympic family members. These individuals will be served by a 
special transportation system and they are expected to use public 
transportation to supplement their travel. The other 
transportation group is comprised of the spectators (ticket holders 
attending the events and those out to just enjoy the Olympic 
excitement) and regional commuters. This group will total more 
than 2 million. It is this second group for which public transit 
will be asked to provide service. 

OVERVIEW OF MARTA 
The Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) is an 
independent single purpose agency created by the Georgia General 
Assembly to plan, build and operate public transportation in 
Metropolitan Atlanta. At the present time, the System serves the 
three most populous jurisdictions in the Atlanta Region: the City 
of Atlanta, DeKalb County and Fulton County. (Very limited service 
also extends into Cobb, Clayton and Gwinnett Counties.) The vast 
majority of Olympic events will be held within the MARTA service 
area. 

In 1971, the voters of Atlanta, Fulton and DeKalb approved a 
comprehensive public transportation plan, including bus 
improvements as well as construction of a rapid rail transit 



2511 



system. The voters also authorized the local governments to levy 
a 1% sales and use tax to fund these improvements. 

Since 1971 MARTA has made numerous capital and service improvements 
involving the Bus System: new equipment; new maintenance and 
operating garages; passenger shelters; new bus routes; improved 
frequencies; extended operating hours; improved schedule 
information, etc. In addition, MARTA has been aggressively 
implementing the rapid rail transit plan. 

The present operating system includes more than 1,500 route miles 
of bus service, 35.9 miles of rapid rail lines and 31 passenger 
stations. Annually, MARTA provides 45.9 million vehicle miles of 
bus and rail service to the citizens of the Atlanta Region. 
Annually, 141 million passengers board the combined system. 

The design of the MARTA rail and bus system is conducive to 
providing excellent service to the Olympic venues. An imaginary 
circle, three miles in diameter, drawn loosely around the MARTA 
Five Points Station is referred to as the Olympic Circle. Most of 
the Olympic activities will take place within this area. Recent 
projections indicate that transportation demand and activity within 
the Olympic Ring will be extremely high; and the means by which 
this traffic is handled will be crucial to the success of these 
Olympics. 

The MARTA transit system currently provides public transportation 
within the Olympic Circle to such proposed Olympic venues as the 
Olympic Stadium (Opening and Closing Ceremonies, Track and Field, 
Football Finals), Atlanta - Fulton County Stadium (Baseball), 
Georgia Tech (Swimming, Boxing, Diving), Atlanta University (Field 
Hockey), Civic Center (Weightlifting) and Georgia Dome-Omni-World 
Congress Center (Gymnastics, Basketball, Volleyball. Wrestling, 
etc. ). 



2512 



The MARTA Rail Plan; 1993 aodate 

General D escription 

As approved by the voters in 1971 and as subsequently amended, the 
MARTA Rail Plan consists of 60 miles of heavy rail lines, 45 
stations and 33,000 parking spaces. The network includes two (2) 
main trunk lines that intersect in the Atlanta Central Business 
District; four (4) rail branches; one (1) feeder rail line; and one 
busway (See Attachment il) 

Current O perating Rail SvBtea 

MARTA has been building the rail system in phases, giving priority 
to those phases which promise the greatest return on investment or 
which are given priority for reasons of construction staging or 
operating efficiencies. 

MARTA has in service 35.9 miles of track, 31 stations and 17,000 
parking spaces. All of Phases A, B, and C (See Attachment #1) have 
now been completed. 

Current Rail Cons truction Program 

1. Building Phase D 

Phase D of the MARTA System consists of 10 miles of track and 
5 stations (See Attachment il). It includes three lines: 1) 
construction of a branch feeder line in the Proctor Creek 
Corridor — between the Ashby Street Station and Bankhead 
Highway--one mile of track and one station; 2) extension of 
the East Line from Avondale to Indian Creek-- three miles of 
track and two stations; and 3) the North Line from Lindbergh 
to the Medical Center — six miles of track and two stations. 

Since our last testimony to the committee, MARTA has opened 
the Bankhead Station on the Proctor Creek Line. During peak 



2513 



service hours that line enters at Ashby Station on the West 
Line and provides uninterrupted service through the Five 
Points Station to Edgewood - Candler Park Station on the East 
Line. 

The 3.1 mile extension of the East Line will soon be 
completed. Final testing is now in progress and revenue 
service to Kensington and Indian Creek is scheduled to begin 
in June, 1993. This will add approximately 4,400 new parking 
spaces to the system and provide the first transit station, 
Indian Creek Station, outside the 1-285 Perimeter. Commuters 
travelling north on 1-285 will have direct access to the 
Indian Creek Station parking area. This station will serve 
as the transition point for transportation to the Olympic 
venues at Stone Mountain Memorial Park and the Georgia 
International Horse Park equestrian center, which is further 
east in Rockdale County. 

The North Line beginning at Canterbury Junction, the point 
where the North Line leaves the Northeast Line, and extending 
to Medical Center Station, is the final segment in Phase D. 
The line consists of 5.7 miles of track and two stations: 
Buckhead and Medical Center. This portion of Phase D is under 
development; detail design, land acquisition, as well as, 
construction are now underway. 

The total current estimated cost of Phase D is $455.0 million, 
of which the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is providing 
$134.5 million or 30%. All federal funds are being applied 
to the East Line extension from Avondale to Indian Creek. The 
feeder line in the Proctor Creek Corridor and the North Line 
to Medical Center are being built with 100% local funds . 



2514 



When Phase D is completed in the mid-90' s, MARTA's rail 
operating system will consist of 44 miles of track and 35 
stations. FTA is providing |1.5 billion or 52% of the $2.9 
billion cost. The local share is $1.4 billion or 48%. 

Developing Phase E 

The only portion of Phase E that is under active development 
is that portion of the North Line which extends north of the 
Medical Center Station through Dunwoody Station and Sandy 
Springs Station to North Springs Station (See Attachment #1). 
This line runs through the North Atlanta Corridor, the fastest 
growing corridor in the Region. The Atlanta Regional 
Commission has projected that the northern portion of the 
corridor, north of 1-285, will have job growth from a base of 
53,000 in 1980 to 431,000 in 2010. There is an increasing 
demand for public transportation to transport workers from the 
Central City to jobs in this corridor. 

As mentioned in Phase D above, the North Line branches off 
the Northeast Line at Canterbury Junction in the vicinity of 
Lenox Square, one of the largest regional shopping centers in 
the metropolitan area. Building in conjunction with a major 
highway improvement (GA 400), the rail line from Buckhead to 
Medical Center, estimated to cost $229 million, will be fully 
financed with local funds. Construction is already underway. 

The North Line portion of Phase E — Medical Center to North 
Springs — is currently estimated to cost $519.1 million. This 
estimate, which is based on completion of the project in the 
year 2004, does not include the cost of Preliminary 
Engineering but does include approximately $104 million to 
purchase additional vehicles. The estimate is $51.7 million 
more than the estimate submitted to the Congress last year. 
This increase in the estimate is due to cost escalation 



2515 



resulting from schedule changes. MARTA's requests for federal 
financial commitment to the Project are expected to total 
$413.31 million. While this represents 80% of the cost of the 
extension, it represents only 55.1% of the cost of the total 
8.8 mile, 5 station North Line. 

Congress has already committed 1122.7 million in earmarks for 
the Project in previous years. These earmarks are currently 
permitting the Authority to undertake the following 
activities: complete the detailed design of the line between 
Medical Center and Dunwoody Station to include the detailed 
design of the Dunwoody Station, acquire right-of-way 
throughout the corridor, complete the construction of the line 
section from Medical Center through Dunwoody to include the 
Dunwoody Station; and begin detailed design of the line north 
of Dunwoody. 

Efforts are being made to complete the North Line project 
through the Dunwoody Station by the 1996 Olympics. Successful 
completion will provide access to and from this densely 
populated area for Olympic activities. At present, this 
schedule is being closely monitored and discussed. The 
failure of the local sales tax to perform up to financial 
projections during this period of recession has caused the 
schedule for construction of the North Line to slip. Efforts 
are currently underway to see if the schedule can be 
recovered. Congress has appropriated $122.7 million for this 
project which represents sufficient federal funds to see the 
project through its initial 7.1 miles and three stations 
(Buckhead, Medical Center and Dunwoody). 

Regardless of the Olympics, the completion of the North Line 
portion of the MARTA Rail System will provide substantial 
benefits in terms of increased ridership, especially reverse 



2516 



conunuting from areas of high unemployment in the central city 
to job-rich suburban employment centers. In addition, further 
reductions in per passenger operating costs are expected along 
with improved travel time savings and positive impacts on 
commercial and retail development. 

The MARTA Bus Plan; 1993 Update 

General Description 

MARTA' s bus fleet consists of 698 buses. There are 150 bus routes 
which cover 1,500 miles. On a daily basis, MARTA buses travel 
91,740 vehicle miles. Buses operate a total of 25.7 million annual 
vehicle revenue miles. In 1992, MARTA experienced an average daily 
ridership of 463,000. 

MARTA strives for safety in the operation of our buses and 
successfully competes with other comparable systems for safety 
recognitions. Recently, the American Public Transit Association 
awarded the 1993 William T. Coleman Silver Award for bus safety to 
MARTA. This award is given to the bus system with the best overall 
safety record and program for the preceding year. 

MARTA has committed itself to providing for 100% accessibility of 
our bus fleet. Currently, the fleet is 57% lift equipped and all 
future bus purchases will meet ADA guidelines for accessibility. 
We are currently studying the feasibility of using 40 foot low 
floor buses in our system to meet the needs of our disabled 
population. Further, MARTA is actively involved in providing ADA 
sensitivity training to our drivers and staff. 

To successfully meet the challenge of the Olympics, our bus fleet 
must be highly dependable as well as safe and accessible. 
Mechanical failures must be kept to an absolute minimum and 
adequate spares must be available in those cases where they are 



2517 



needed. This means that our older, less reliable, buses must be 
replaced; and we will have to approach the Federal Transit 
Administration for permission to temporarily increase our spare 
ratio during this critical time frame. 

Pursuing this course of action will, fortunately, result in some 
other positive outcomes. For instance, more of our bus fleet will 
be accessible to the disabled in compliance with Congress' mandates 
in the Americans with Disabilities Act. Undoubtedly, a number of 
Olympic spectators will need such transportation services. Also, 
the newer buses will meet requirements in the Clean Air Act 
Amendments. Both requirements will result in a more positive 
impression being made on all of our Olympic visitors and local 
populace alike. 



Fiscal Year 1994 Federal Funding Request 

MARTA respectfully requests the Appropriations Committees of the 
United States Congress to earmark $20.8 million in FT 1994 FTA 
Section 3 bus and bus related funds for 100 replacement buses and 
certain bus facility improvements to meet the demands on public 
transit necessitated by the 1996 Olympic Games. 

Of the requested $20.8 million in FY 1994 Section 3 bus funds, 
$17.6 million is required as the federal share to purchase 100 
replacement buses for current fleet buses built between 1978 and 
1982. They exceed the minimum FTA replacement criteria of 12 years 
or 500,000 miles of accumulated service. All of the buses to be 
replaced are non-lift equipped. The new buses will fully meet the 
requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act, as well as, 
the Clean Air Act Amendments. Efforts to bring as much of the bus 
fleet into compliance with these two acts is critical in presenting 
the appropriate transit profile when the world comes to Atlanta. 



2518 



The remaining $3.2 million is needed to provide bus facility 
improvements. Specifically, paint booths are to be constructed at 
two garages to comply with Environmental Protection Agency 
requirements [|0.6M];- the heavy maintenance garage will be 
renovated and an engine/transmission rebuild area will be added 
[|1.9M], and an existing operating garage will be expanded to 
better accommodate the bus fleet assigned to it [$1.5M]. 

Although MARTA will be returning to request Congressional 
assistance to continue the North Line new start project beyond 
Dunwoody to North Springs, it was determined that the most pressing 
and immediate need of the transit system as a whole is to make our 
bus fleet more reliable and more accessible when the world comes 
to visit the United States and Atlanta in 1996. 



2519 



Attachment #1 




• Unumtmrm AUttmtm l t Mi«/«r ttoMMi L» e« ll»w wtfOT ilntfy 



\t 






marta. 

RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM 



PHASES A. B, 4 C M OPEIUTION 
(W UNOEH DEVELOPMENT 

PtMSEO 



I I PHASE E 

I PHASE E (BU8WAT) 



• I I i t I 



miMem i*« 



2520 



CHICAGO, IL 

DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION 

STATEMENT OF DAVID R. MOSENA, COMMISSIONER OF AVIATION 

My name is David R. Mosena. I am the Commissioner of the City of Chicago's 
Department of Aviation. I am responsible for overseeing the management, operation, 
development, safety and security of the City of Chicago's three airports: O'Hare 
International, Midway and our lakefront airport, Meigs Field. Thank you for the 
opportunity to present testimony describing the importance of implementing improvements 
in the Chicago airport/airspace system. 

For the past several years, my predecessors have spoken before you about escalating delays 
at Chicago airports and the rippling effect of these delays at airports across the Nation. We 
told you that more aircraft are delayed each year at O'Hare than at any other airport in the 
nation. Airlines pay hundreds of millions of dollars in direct operating costs (i.e., fuel, crew 
salaries, etc.) each year as a result of delays at O'Hare alone. These costs do not include 
the inconvenience of delays and cancelled flights to the traveling- public, which can be 
enormous. Although we have seen improvements in recent years, delays remain a problem 
in Chicago. 

We have also shared with you the results of the 1991 Chicago Delay Task Force Study. 
That landmark report identifies a number of airfield, procedural and technological 
improvements capable of reducing the direct operating cost of delays in Chicago by more 
than $100 million annually. After the release of that report, the FAA and the City of 
Chicago formed a joint working group to help implement the Study recommendations. 
You supported the formation of this group and we are grateful. This group, comprised of 
FAA, airline and airport operations specialists, has focused its attention in the past two 
years on improving air traffic control procedures in the Chicago terminal airspace system. 
In fact, much of the delay reduction experienced at O'Hare since 1988 can be attributed to 
the efforts of this group. We also applaud the FAA and the airlines, for without their 
cooperation and commitment, these improvements would not have occurred. 

While things are beginning to look better, much remains to be accomplished. In fact, 
delays were actually higher in 1992 than in the previous year. FAA data shows that nearly 
40,000 O'Hare aircraft were delayed more than 15 minutes in FY 1992. This is eight 
percent more than the number of aircraft delayed at O'Hare in FY 1991. This is also 20 
percent more than the number of aircraft delayed at Newark, O'Hare's clo.sesl competitor 
in terms of total delayed aircraft. Since O'Hare serves more passengers and more aircraft 
than any airport in the world, the impact of delays at O'Hare affect more people at more 
airports throughout liie nation and even tliroughout the world. To make matters worse, 
currently available delay reporting systems do not necessarily reveal the true severity of the 
delay problem in Chicago. Delays less than 15 minutes in duration arc not included in the 
1"A,'\ delay data, nor arc some delays that arc incurred outside of Chicajio liecausc of 
limiiaiions at O'llare. 

ITie real delay problem in Chicago continues to occur during poor weather. Two thirds of 
O'Hare delays are experienced 30 percent of the time during low visibility, wet pavement 
and high wind conditions. During good weather, O'Hare operates with relatively few 
delays. The wide variation between good weather and poor weather performance is the 
most critical factor limiting overall system operational efficiency at O'Hare. 

The need for improvements in Chicago is clear. I am here today to ask for preferential 
consideration for City of Chicago Airport Improvement Program (AlP) Discretionary 
Grant Applications as well as to solicit a level of funding necessary to support the FAA's 
Research, Engineering and Development Program. 



2521 



AlP Discretionary Grants 

The City of Chicago has identified several key projects for O'Hare and Midway that require 
AIP Discretionary Grants in Fiscal Year 1994. These projects are each characterized as 
capacity and safety projects, and thus, are assigned the highest priority rating by the FAA. 
We ask that you give preferential report language for O'Hare and Midway Airports. The 
following airport projects are designed to reduce delays, enhance operating efficiency and 
reduce noise: 

1. Flow-Through aircraft holding areas for O'Hare near the end of Runway 9R 
and abeam the Scenic Taxiway to help alleviate airfield "gridlock" conditions 
and to provide an opportunity for remote deicing. 

2. Rehabilitation of Runway 4I^22R at Midway Airport to improve the runway 
surface and to enhance the efficiency of airfield surface traffic operations. 

Please ask the FAA to give high priority to O'Hare and Midway Airports in project 
application for Discretionary AIP Grants. The O'Hare project was recommended by the 
Chicago Delay Task Force and will reduce delay and enhance safety in Chicago and 
throughout the National Airspace System. 

FAA Research. Engineering and Development fR,E&D) 



The City of Chicago joins Airports Council International (ACI) and the Air Transport 
Association (ATA) in asking that you appropriate a funding level of $300 million during 
FY 1994 to allow the FAA to pursue its R,E&D Plan. Each of the projects defined in that 
plan will improve the quality of air transportation services not only in Chicago but at 
airports across the nation. 

In addition to supporting the overall FAA R,E&D Plan, I would like to use this opportunity 
to highlight seven individual projects that offer substantial opportunities to reduce delays, 
enhance operational efficiency and improve the controller working environment at (he 
iialion's busiest airport systems. The airlines serving Chicago, the Fcilcral Aviation 
Administration and the City of Ciiicago agree that seven projecls are critical lor reducing 
delay and improving system ojieraling performance. We urge the Committee to allocate 
sufficient funding for each of these delay rcductidii projecls. 

1. The Multinlc Parallel Approach Program will result in the procedures necessary to 
safely conduct simultaneous independent approaches to three runways during 
Instrument Meteorological Conditions, thereby enabling significant savings in delay. 
As mentioned in the 1991 Chicago Delay Task Force Report, the use of triple parallel 
IFR approaches at O'Hare offers the potential to reduce delay costs by more than $40 
million annually, the single most effective means to reduce poor weather delays at 
O'Hare. As part of this program, the FAA is testing high resolution color controller 
displays known as the Final Monitor Aid (FMA) using real-time simulation 
techniques at Tlie FAA Technical Center. The integration of the FMA with existing 
radar equipment will dramatically improve the controller working environment at 
many of the Nation's busiest airports including O'Hare. 



2. Triple Converging Approach Procedures - The FAA System Capacity Office is 
examining the feasibility of conducting simultaneous independent approaclies to two 
parallel and one converging runway. The Chicago Delay Task Force found that this 
procedure would reduce the cost of poor weather delays at O'Hare by more than $20 
million annually. Additional funding is necessary to evaluate the feasibility of 
implementing this procedure through real-time controller simulation analysis at the 
FAA Technical Center. 



2522 



3. Terminal Air Traffic Control Automation (TATCA) Program , which includes the 
Center/TRACON Automation System (CTAS), will provide air traffic controllers in 
busy airport systems such as Chicago with precise information necessary to reduce 
inter-arrival variability, select optimal flight paths and minimize the potential for 
missed approaches. CTAS offers the potential to significantly improve performance 
in Chicago by providing controllers ATC advisories through three automation aids: a 
Traffic Management Advisor (TMA) and Descent Advisor (DA) for the Air Route 
Traffic Control Center and a Final Approach Spacing Tool (FAST) for the 
TRACON. The information provided by these systems will enable controllers to 
more efficiently sequence aircraft traffic, thereby enhancing operational efficiency 
and reliability, and consequently reducing controller workload and delays. 

4. Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) offers opportunities to increase the 
precision of both airfield surface and enroute navigafion and surveillance techniques 
using currently available satellite technology. Use of GNSS technology will enhance 
operational efficiency and safety through accurate aircraft position reporting, reduced 
separation minimums and improved cockpit situational awareness. At O'Hare, this 
technology is currently being examined as a means improve the control of airfield 
surface vehicles (e.g. emergency response vehicles) and aircrafi under ail weather 
conditions. This system is capable of reducing the risk of runway incursion.s, 
particularly during poor weather conditions. 

5. .TJic_Ajri)orl Surface Trainc A utomati on Program , which includes /Xirport Surface 
Delcciion liquipiiieni (.\SDl;-3) and the Airport Movcnu'iil Aic;i SjIoiv Sysioni 
(AM.ASS). uill provide a comprehensive airfield surface safety svskni lo prevent 
runway incursions and to integrate surface traffic management automation capability 
with other air traffic control automation systems. This technology will reduce surface- 
related flight delays and will reduce the potential for airfield gridlock, a critical 
problem at O'Hare, particularly during poor weather conditions. Further, the 
complexity of the O'Hare ground control function, ofien referred to as the most 
demanding position in the Nation's air traffic control system, warrants an elevation in 
priority for the installation of an ASDE-3 at the O'Hare Air Traffic Control Tower. 

6. The FAA/NASA Wake Vortex Program Plan offers the potential to safely reduce 
aircraft spacing requirements through the application of separation standards that 
more closely reflect aircraft wake vortex characteristics. Additional funding is 
necessary to support FY 1994 research efforts by FAA and NASA in the areas of 
wake vortex detection, classification, and analysis that would culminate in changes in 
aircraft separation standards. Simulation analysis has demonstrated that reduced 
separation standards would reduce delays by over 10,000 hours aruiually at O'Hare, 
representing an annual direct aircraft operaUng cost savings of more than $20 Million. 

7. Airport Pavement Research Program involves research in the areas of material 
quality, design, evaluation, construction and maintenance, longer lasting pavement 
materials will be developed and improved analytical techniques for pavement design 
and evaluation will be formulated. The results of this research offer the potential to 
significantly reduce the construction and maintenance cost of new pavement, as well 
as the aircraft operational delay impact associated with airfield pavement 
rehabilitation. 



In closing, we thank you for recognizing the critical need to enhance the efficiency of our 
nation's air transportation system by providing your support last year. We ask that you 
continue with this support by allocating sufficient appropriations in fiscal year 1994 for 
each of the projects I have outlined this morning. As we concluded last year, we all stand 
to gain by a more efficient air transportation system. Similarly, we will all pay the price if 
escalating flight delays are not addressed now. 

Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony on behalf of the City of Chicago 
Department of Aviation. 



2523 

CENTRAL AREA CIRCULATOR PROJECT 
STATEMENT OF STEPHEN E. SCHLICKMAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

Introduction 

On behalf of Richard M. Daley, Mayor of the City of Chicago, I wish to express our 
appreciation for the opportunity to submit testimony to the Senate Appropriations 
Subcommittee on Transportation and Related Agencies in support of continued Section 3 New 
Start appropriations for the City of Chicago's Central Area Circulator project (hereafter referred 
to as "the Circulator"). I am Stephen E. Schlickman, Executive Director of the project. For the 
last four years, the subcommittee has been very supportive of our project. We greatly 
appreciate the past assistance that you have provided and will present our case for additional 
funding in FY 1994. 

For FY 1994 we are requesting an earmark of $57.6 million for the Circulator project. This 
less than the $ 104. 1 million request that we earlier requested of the House Appropriation 
Commmittee. It is the result of a subsequent discussion with the Federal Transit 
Administration, acknowledgement of the funding constraints on the new start program, and our 
willingness to bear a greater funding burden at the local level for 1994. To substantiate this 
request, I will provide a description and status of the project and an explanation of our plans 
for 1994. 

Project Description 

The Central Area Circulator is a major transit project to serve Chicago's downtown. It 
responds to a long-recognized need for improved distribution and circulation of people within 
Chicago's Central Area. Our Central Area is one of the most successful centers of commerce 
in the worid. It is responsible for about 40 percent of all jobs in the City and contains more 
than 60 percent of the region's office space. Chicago's Central Area is key to the City's and 
the State of Illinois' current and future economic growth. 

One reason for Chicago's Central Area vitality, at a time when many city cores are in decline, is 
the vision of civic leaders in the last century, who realized that the key to the business district's 
growth was effective access to it by transit. Through the implementation of that vision the 
Chicago region has an extremely effective and comprehensive rail transit service from the 
suburbs and the City neighborhoods to the Loop, the original one square-mile business district 
present at the tum-of-the century. This transportation asset is largely responsible for the 
growth of the Loop district to a six square mile area where over 1 million people each day 
work, shop, recreate and live. 

The tremendous expansion of the Central Area, however, means that walking from place to 
place within the downtown is no longer a convenient possibility. The myriad of employment, 
retail, cultural and educational designations in the comers of the CenU-al Area are not effectively 
served by the line haul rail transit terminals principally located in the Loop. Furthermore, 
development now underway downtown but outside the Loop, at Navy Pier, Cityfront Center, 
McCormick Place and Central Station, for example, will place even greater demands on 



2524 



Chicago's transit system in the years ahead. Regional planning agencies project a substantial 
growth in trips to and within the Central Area by the year 2010 which will place impossible 
demands on an already constrained and congested road system. Realizing the full potential of 
existing major developments and spurring future development is jeopardized by an ineffective, 
capacity constrained bus transportation system. The vision for the Circulator is to meet the 
need for better downtown transportation by constructing a high capacity light rail system that 
will provide an easy to use and reliable transit operation extending the benefits of the existing 
line-haul rail system to the emerging comers of the greater Central Area. It will also 
substantially increase the ability of the road system to accommodate more trips through traffic 
congestion. 

A brief description of the preliminary light rail system plan with a system map is attached 
(Attachment A) for your reference. 

Project Status 

As reported in testimony last year, the City's selection of a light rail transit improvement for 
preliminary engineering (PE) design was approved by the Federal Transit Administration 
(FTA) in the Spring of 1992. (The executive summary of the Locally Preferred Alternative 
Report justifying the light rail selection was submitted for the record at that time.) The 
following provides a brief summary of the project schedule, the status of the PE work, and an 
update on the flnancial plan. 

Project Schedule 

Attachment B summarizes the schedule for the remainder of the project and describes the key 
PE milestones. Last summer we set the ambitious deadline of September, 30 1994 for PE. PE 
brings the light rail system up thirty percent of final design. To date we have accomplished the 
prescribed milestones through ten percent of final design and expect to meet the twenty percent 
deadline this June. We have now completed approximately fifty percent of the PE work. 
There are, however, some risks associated with future milestone dates. 

We are considering an adjustment to the Final Environmental Impact Statement schedule and 
are holding the April draft chapter submissions to the FTA. This is to allow the resolution of 
community concerns and value engineering recommendations regarding the light rail system 
alignment. If we make the schedule adjustments, under a reasonable risk assessment we 
expect to complete the PE phase of project within four and a half months of the original 
schedule. This should not jeopardize the schedule for major work elements we have planned 
for 1994. 

Preliminary Engineering Work 

The key work activity of PE is completion of the Final Environment Impact Statement which 
provides the best information on costs, impact mitigation, and benefits of the project before 
receiving federal approval for final design and construction. We view this stage more broadly 
than meeting just the strict requirements of the federal environmental and FTA approval 
process. When constructed, the Circulator will be introducing a major new presence in 



2525 



Chicago's densely developed downtown. To do that successfully we must develop an 
approach that incorporates the best light rail design, an effective urban design strategy, and a 
new traffic management plan into an integrated approach that is molded in conjunction with an 
extensive community outreach process. 

In order to meet that objective, we established a project team that has four major components. 
First we have an engineering design group lead by a joint venture comprised of two firms, 
Parsons De Leuw, Inc. and McDonough Associates, Inc. Together they provide the project 
excellent light rail and Chicago transportation design experience. This team includes a technical 
advisory/peer review board with national and international light rail expertise. Secondly, we 
have an urban design group lead by Sasaki Associates, Inc., which was recently responsible 
for the urban design program for the Dallas light rail transit mall. Thirdly, our community 
relations effort is lead by two well respected local firms, MK Communications and Julie E. 
Hamos and Associates. Finally, we have a strong management/oversight group principally 
staffed through ICF Kaiser Engineers, Inc., Stein & Company, and U.S. Equities, Inc., a joint 
venture that has substantial rail design and project management experience 

We have accomplished a number of major work tasks since the beginning of PE. Last 
November the Circulator Board of Directors selected the system of alignments for the light rail 
system. This involved an extensive Central Area community process to address public 
concerns regarding the aligrunents and a detailed analysis of the technical pros and cons of 
various options. Information from both efforts was analyzed by the team with the aid of a 
sophisticated computerized decision making model. 

Subsequently the team proceeded to develop and publish alignment station and track location 
drawings (see Attachment C example) for community comment. After extensive review, the 
track and station location plan is currendy being adjusted to mitigated community impacts and 
incorporated into a traffic management and light rail operating plan. The urban design group 
has inventoried all existing physical conditions along the alignment, determined the urban 
design opportunities and constraints, developed station location guidelines, and published a 
framework of urban design principles (see Attachment D). 

A key element that is well underway is the vehicle specification. Attachment E depicts a 
European design of a 70% low floor vehicle which is serving as the basis for our design 
criteria. The low floor requirement is critical for our system to ensure quick boarding and 
alighting and full accessibility for the disabled beyond the minimum requirements of the 
Americans with Disability AcL The concept design depicted on Attachment E should also 
ensure open competition from a variety of vehicle manufacturer bidders and meeting the 
objectives of the federal buy America requirements. 

We are now proceeding toward the 20% of final design report to the Circulator Board. A 
description of the work product for this phase is found in Attachment B. 

Financial Plan 

Two years ago we estimated for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) the capital 
cost of the project to be $590 million in 1990 dollars. Our 10% of final design report to the 



2526 



Circulator Board of Directors re-estimated the cost at $600 million. Following the cost 
elements of the DEIS capital budget, substantial adjustments were made in the original estimate 
to accommodate significant changes in the DEIS concept alignment and to reflect better 
information on unit costs. We are continuing to refine the capital budget to keep the DEIS cost 
elements within the $590 million total. We are also considering the addition of a construction 
reserve cost element that was not in the DEIS and are exploring strategies to minimize its 
impact on the 1990 dollar estimate. Once that is completed we will reexamine the DEIS 
escalated capital cost estimate of $750 million. 

The operating cost estimate published in the DEIS is being refined and will be in accordance 
with a new operating plan. 

Our capital financial plan is predicated on the DEIS $590 million (1990 $) budget funded one- 
third by the federal government, one-third by the City of Chicago, and one-third by the State of 
Illinois. Implementation of this plan has continued to move forward. 

At the federal level, you have provided us annual appropriations since FY 1990. To date an 
approximate total of $59 million has been earmarked by Congress for the Circulator project to 
date. Of that amount approximately $19 million has been granted to the City of Chicago for 
planning and preliminary engineering work. The remaining $40 million will be obligated by 
the project in 1 994 along with our new funding request of $ 104. 1 million. (See section 
"FY 1994 Funding Need" below for further explanation.) Our ISTEA authorization for 1992 to 
1997 is $260 million. 

As we reported last year, the Chicago City Council passed a Special Service Area tax levy on 
commercial real estate to fund the local one-third share of the capital budget. The boundary of 
the service area is within the City's central area and configured to tax those commercial 
properties most directly benefiting from the project. The first collection of the tax occurred last 
August and produced approximately $14 million. By law, when the property tax levy is 
pledged directly for debt service on a bond issuance, as planned, it is not limited. To the extent 
that the assessed valuation in the Special Service Area does not grow as projected, the levy can 
be increased over contemplated levels to meet debt service requirements. This provides the 
project an extremely stable source of local funding. 

The State of IHinois continues to abide by its agreement with the City to fund one-third of the 
Circulator's capital cost. We have previously explained to the subcommittee that in 1989, the 
State agreed, through then Governor Jim Thompson in a memorandum of understanding 
(MOU), to provide $20 million for the design of the Circulator and to fund one-third of the cost 
of construction, pending the City's and the State's evaluations of the planning and engineering 
work. The specific language of the MOU is as follows: 

"Recognizing the need to address critical traffic congestion problems affecting 
Chicago's Central Area, the State will provide an amount equivalent to one-third or not 
more 3ian $20 million of the cost, of planning and engineering of the Downtown 
[Circulator] Project over five years concluding with end of State fiscal year 1994. 
Further, the State will provide one-third of the cost of construction (emphasis added) in 
the Fiscal Year 1995-99 time period based on both the State's and City's evaluation of 
the engineering and planning work when it is completed." City/State Memorandum of 



2527 



Understanding, Five Year Chicago Street [*rogram. State Fiscal Years 1990 Through 
1994. June 30. 1989. page 2. 

Current Governor Jim Edgar has been abiding by this agreement. To date. $ 14 million has 
been appropriated by the State for the project. Recently Governor Edgar requested the Dlinois 
General Assembly to appropriate an additional $4 million. By the end of preliminary 
engineering Mayor Daley will present the results of that work to the Governor and seek 
agreement on the scope of the project for Final design and construction, including a 
reaffirmation of the State's commitment to fund one-third of the cost of construction. 

FY 1994 Funding Request 

As noted above, we expect to close preliminary engineering and be into final design and 
construction by the end of this year or early next year. Subsequently in 1994 we need $288.2 
million from all sources to cover expenditures and new contracts. It is important to emphasize 
that the funds are needed to nuuntain the project schedule. Timing is extremely important. Any 
delay in funding would suggest a delay in contracting for project activities which in turn would 
expose capital costs to escalation increases. $288.2 million will fund the following 
programmed activities for 1994: 

FINAL ENGINEERING: S^U 9 Mn.t.rnN Fmal engineering will continue throughout 
the year and continue through 1995, overiapping with major construction activities. 

RIGHT-OF-WAY: S35..1 Mn.IJON This includes the purchase of right-of-way and 
properties for the Riverbank line (blue route). Lake Front line (green route), and the 
Yard/Shop (see map in Attachment A). The purchases are to take place during the first 
half of 1994 to accommodate construction site preparation and utility relocation 
activities. 

VRHin F S: S 169.4 M TT .1 .ION Procurement of 66 vehicles is considered a long lead 
item which will be ready for award soon after federal approval to move into final design 
and construction in order to avoid delay in the overall project schedule. It is necessary to 
have full funding of the vehicles in hand to provide the manufacturer with the least 
amount of financial risk and, thereby, secure a fum contract at the best price. 

YARD/SHOP: S43 MILLION Immediately subsequent to the purchase of the yard site, 
this amount is required for site preparation beginning in the third quarter of 1994 and 
securing construction contracts for fast-track building of the yard and shop facility. 

RIVERBANK AND CROSS LOOP LINES: $5.6 MILLION Final design will be 
underway and utility relocation requirements will have been identified for the Riverbank 
line and the Cross Loop line (blue and red routes respectively on map in Attachment A). 
This is an initial amount, for the relocation of public utilities. These activities involve 
constructing temporary facilities to maintain utility service and traffic flow; and removing 
existing utilities and replacing them in accordance with the LRT system design 
requirements. 



2528 



We propose that the $288.2 million funding requirement be split between available and new 
funding resources as indicated in the following table: 

1994 Funding Requirements ($ in Millions) 



Category 


Available $ 


New$ 


Total 1 


Federal 


Local 


State 


Final Engineering 

Right-of-Way 

Vehicles 

Construction 

Yard/Shop 

Riverbank/Cross Loop 


$30.9 






$4.0 


$34.9 


$35.3 








$35.3 


$9.8 


$52.1 


$107.5 




$169.4 


1 






1 




$2.7 


$40.3 




$43.0 




$2.8 


$2.8 




$5.6 


Total 


$76.0' 


$57.6 


$150.6 


$4.0 


$288.2 



' Includes S40 million in prior year federal appropriations. 



As indicated in the table we arc seeking $57.6 million in new federal funding in FY 1994. 
Combined with prior year appropriations, $97.6 of federal funds will be expended or obligated 
by the project next year. The federal funding will cover one-third the 1994 program cost of 
$288.2 million, equal to the one-third federal share were are seeking for the entire project. The 
local funding shares will substantially exceed one-third of the 1994 funding requirement in 
order to make up for the low state participation. Beginning in 1995 State funding is expected 
to increase per the MOU (discussed above) so that the one-third parity of funding resources, as 
planned, is achieved by the end of the project. 

Please note that our federal funding request was developed on a contractual obligation basis not 
a cash basis. To meet City of Chicago purchasing requirements, and to ensure that contracts 
are fully funded to obtain the lowest bid price, it is necessary that all funding be awarded to the 
City before contracts are bid and executed. 

FTA 1993 Section 3 (j) Report 

The Federal Transit Administration's 3(j) Report recommended a new FY 1994 funding 
level of only $5 million for the Circulator. Additionally, the FTA is nd recommending that 
the project receive a full funding grant agreement in FY 1994. Initially this was very 
perplexing to us. During a discussion with FTA and the Department of Transportation 
Secretary's Office we learned the basis for the estimate. Unfortunately it has left us with 
impression that FTA has provided Congress an arbitrary assessment that is not supported 
by the current status of the project. 

FTA sought no information from the Circulator regarding the project's federal funding need 
for 1994. The only contact that we had with the FTA prior to the Section 3 (j) Report 
publication was to comment on the FTA's draft project profile which made no mention of 
the FTA's assessment of the Circulator's funding needs. 

Furthermore, the 3 (j) report acknowledges on page 22 that the Circulator is scheduled to 
end preliminary engineering by October I, 1993. It is customary for the FTA to enter into 



2529 



a full funding grant agreement within 120 days of that date. In fact the FTA Region V 
Office in Chicago has been begun preliminary discussions with the us on the agreement so 
that it can be executed promptly after the close of preliminary engineering. Once 
preliminary engineering is closed and approval is given for the next phase of final design 
and construction, a project can proceed, prior to the completion of the full funding grant 
agreement, with major purchases and construction activities as we have outlined for 1994. 

Finally the 3(j) Report leaves the impression that various technical issues related to light rail on- 
slreet operation will take one year after preliminary engineering to resolve. Current technical 
work, including a very extensive community involvement program, is addressing those issues 
this year. On-street operation in a downtown setting is common to virtually every light rail 
system in the United States and particularly prevalent in major European cities that present 
many of the same challenges that we face in Chicago's Central Area. We have experts on our 
project team who are richly knowledgeable of U.S. and European light rail operations. During 
our recent meeting with the FTA they did acknowledge that the issues they have identified 
could be resolved in a more timely fashion and that it is possible for the project to advance to a 
full funding grant agreement in 1994. 

Conclusion 

We understand that our funding request of $57.6 million is a substantially large amount vis-a- 
vis the Administration's total budget request of $657 million for the entire Section 3 New Start 
program. It, however, does cover only one-third of the project's program commitment 
requirements which we are confident can happen in 1994. We have shown good evidence 
during preliminary engineering that we are meeting a very ambitious schedule. With sufficient 
resources coupled to the project's existing drive, we will move this project forward in a manner 
that achieves Congress' objective of expeditious commitment of federal funding to cost 
effective projects. 

This completes our written testimony. Please let us know if you are in need of additional 
information. 



Tfi-fiQ"^ o - 94 - 4 



2530 



Central Area Circulator Project 




ATTACILMENT A 


. .- :'...-:■:::; . :-..::. 


SVsf EM SUMMARY ' 


■y,, :.: 



System Overview 




OBJECTIVES: 


To provide transportation between the major activity centers of 
the Central Area and the transportation links with the 
neighborhoods and suburbs of the City. 




To protect and enhance the physical and social environment of 
the Central Area. 




To improve transportation within the Central Area lor 
commuters, tourists, shoppers, and the physically disabled. 




To promote economic development within the Central Area. 


ROUTES: 


The Central Area Circulator (CACI will have four overlapping 
routes, connecting the following centers of activity: 


Lakefront: 


• From Navy Pier to just south of IVIcCormick Center, 
generally running parallel to the lake front. 


Riverbank: 


• From Central Area northeastern sector to Northwestern 
StationAJnion Station, generally running parallel to the 
north bank of the east branch of the Chicago River, then 
parallel to the west bank of the south branch of the 
Chicago River. This line connects with CTA rapid transit. 


Madison-Oak: 


• From Central Area northeastern sector to Northwestern 
Station/Union Station, running parallel to the lake front to 
Madison, then crossing the Loop on Madison. This line 
connects with CTA rapid transit. 


Madison-McCormIck: 


• From McCormick Place to Northwestern Station/Union 
Station, running parallel to the lake front to Madison, then 
crossing the Loop on Madison. 




Each of these routes will provide service at 2.5 to 5 minute 
intervals, during peak periods, and at 5 to 10 minute intervals, 
during off-peak periods. 


CHALLENGE: 


To increase the total movement of people within the Central 
Area, while decreasing vehicle congestion. 


OPPORTUNITIES: 


To improve access to offices and businesses within the Central 
Area. 




To slow the growth of demand for parking in the Central Area. 




To improve the downtown streetscape with a quality pedestrian 
environment. 



2531 



ADOPTED SYSTEM / PRELIMINARY STATIONS 




2532 



cbiiuoi /Mbd oiii^uMioi l-ioiect 



AllALlLMtNl A 



ALIGNMENT 



Summafv of Maiof Futl-Build LRT Characteristics 



Length of Track 

Track Width 
Stations 

Station Size 
LRT Vehicles 



Facilities 

Total 

Grade-separated 

Reserved street lanes 

Two-way 

2-way stops 

1-way stops 

Length 
Width 

186-passenger capacity, 70% low floor 



LRT Maintenance 1 3 acres 

arnl Storage Facility capacity 

Fare Collection 



*'ff:,'J.'-.''?- 



Operations ,; . 

Headways Peak hours (A.M. and P.M.) 

Mid-day 

Evening, Weekend 

Potential Routes West Loop/Riverbank/North Michigan 

(weekday peak hour) West Loop/Loop/North Michigan 
McCormick Ptace/Loop/Navy Pier 
McCofmick PlaceA-oop/West Loop 



Vehicle-Miles of 
Service 



LRT (in 20101 



Buses (within Central Area in 2010) 



Average Travel Time Include walk access and wait time 
(peak period) 

Average Weekday Passenger boardings (year 2010) 

Riders on LRT 



17.0 miles 


1.0 miles 


16.0 miles 


24 to 36 feet 


25 


8 


1 80 feet 


10 to 12 feet 


66 vehicles 


13 acres 


75+ vehicles 



Proof-of-Payment 



2)4-5 minutes 
5-10 
10-20 
4 total 



6,300 veh. 
miles/year 

21,600 veh. 
miles/year 

1 8 minutes 

1 20,000 pass, 
trips/day 



2533 



Central Area Circulator Project 



Al fAtllMEMT A 



ALIGNMENT 



LRT Capacity and Labor Unit Reauifements 

Type of Vehicle 
Capacity of Vehicle (persons) 
Vehicles per Train 
Capacity per Train 

Cycle Length (seconds) 
Maximum Train per Cycle per Direction 
Total Trains per Hour per Direction 
Capacity per (Hour per Direction 

Operators per Train per Direction 
Operators per Hour per Direction 
Capacity per Operator per Direction 

Operators required per Direction at: 
5,000 persons per hour 
10,000 persons per hour 



BUS 


LRT' 




articulated 


double ar 


ticulated 


75 




186 


1 




2 


75 




372 


75 




75 


2 




1 


96 




48 


7,200 




17,856 


1 




1 


96 




48 


75 




372 



66 

133 



13 
27 



' LRT vehicle standing room capacity calculated at the rate of 4 persons per square meter 



2534 



AT') /iillMl.ill i' 



I- 

o 

Q. 

o 



3 

o 

OC 



UJ 

D 
lU 

X 

o 
to 



I- 

a:< 
<5 



3 



< 

cc 

H 
Z 

LU 

o 



•V 

rt 

it* 
m 


o 

rj 
a 

5 

•» 
<» 

»o 

tt 
a 
a 
a 
a 

rl 
O 















































































































■-- 








- 






















- 
































- 




























- 
















- ■ 


















— 








- - 





































- 














-■ 


























- 










■ - 










- 






















— . 


















~ 


- 






- 








5 
































o 




















4 




















n 
<3 














- 










-< 




























1 


'4 








- 














a 
a 
o 






- 








^ 1 
























•< 


























- 


























1 

■8 




1 
< 


3 
< 
E 
< 

3 

u 
-1 
3 


t- 

£ 

2 

ui 

Z 
u. 

lU 

e 

1 

< 




N 

*t 
«l 

d 

> 

2 
13 

-1 
< 

O. 
O 

a 

< 
a 

E 
t 

2 




z 

lu 

o 

lie 
O 
z 
11/ 

: 

« 

a. 




n 
01 

01 
dl' 

< 
5 

y- 
tc 

o 

a. 

Ul 

C£ 

o 

cc 
< 
o 

° 




z 
u 

UJ 

o 

f 

o 

N 

c 
o 

z 
w 

5 
■J 

Q: 
0. 




r> 

A 
Ol 

Z 
? 

fr- 
ee 
o 

a. 

UJ 

cc 

o 
<c 

i 




z 

<A 

Ul 

a 

f. 

o 
c 

"; 
J 

Ui 

C 

a 




8 

1- 
tt. 
O 

a. 

(U 

a: 

O 

f 
< 

s 

o 

o 




<2 

uj 




O 

u 

< 
Z 

o 

;? 

z 

UJ 

ul 

U 

o 

K 
< 

o 
ffi 

VI 

a 

u. 




o 

5 

z 

2 




r» 
fft 

z 

iA 

s 

U 
UJ 

O 

o 

Q 

a: 
O 

o 

u 

cc 

< 




a. 

UJ 
VI 

Z 
UJ 

c 
< 

o 
z 

(I 


1 

1 

J 


5 

UJ 

a 
< 

2 
U. 




z 
o 
p 
w 

D 

a 
u 
< 

> 
< 
? 

It. 
o 

t- 

X 

13 

OC 


1 


t- 

s 

c 
D 

5i 

OC 
a. 
Ul 

u 

i 

UJ 

> 


1 


2 
O 

y- 
O 

IC 

1- 

o 


L. 


CC 

< 
5 

UJ 

U 

> 

IE 
Ul 
Ml 
Ul 

r? 

> 

Ul 
(E 










-/ 






o- 

Ou. 



2535 



Central Area Circulator Project 



AliAClUlbtU li 



SCHEDULE 



^•j^tf^trt^t^-^ 



Descriptions of Milestones 



GENERAL 



10% P.E. 



20% P.E. 



The project is divided into three major milestones corresponding to phases in 
preliminary engineering: 10%; 20%; and 30%. Each of these phases will be 
accompanied by an engineer's report that summarizes conditions at each 
milestone level. The 10% report is directed toward defining major project 
issues. The 20% report will describe issue resolution and remaining or new 
issues. The 30% report will describe issue resolution and the final product of 
preliminary engineering. Each phase will be accompanied by a project cost 
estimate. 

This phase will define the placement of track and stations within the 
alignments selected. It will also define the street system that will be tested 
to develop the Traffic Management Plan. 



Track & Station 
Systems 
Yard & Shop 
Operating Plan 
Traffic 

Urban Design 
Capital Cost Estimate 
Operating Cost Estimate 



Preliminary location. 

Information for Criteria. No application. 

Preliminary layout. 

Basic concept for testing. 

Definition of Street System. 

Concepts for areas of the system. 

Update in 1990 $. 

None. 



This phase will resolve alignment and station issues and fix the alignment 
within the streets. It will also include a program for implementation of the 
system that defines schedule and contract packaging. The traffic 
management information will define the street conditions and the training 
operating plan will be defined. 



Track & Stations 
Systems 

Yard & Shop 

Operating Plan 

Traffic 

Urban Design 
Vehicles 

Capital Cost Estimate 



Final location and mathematized. 

All systems defined and preliminary 

applications completed. 

Final configuration defined and shop 

facilities defined. 

Complete to allow preliminary estimate of 

operating costs. 

Management Plan defined. 

Area specific design concepts defined. 

Preliminary performance specification 

completed for industry review. 

Update including inflation based on 

construction schedule. 



2536 



Central Area Circulator Project 



ATTACHMENT B 



30% P.E. 



FEIS 



SCHEDULE 



This phase will complete all remaining prelimlnarv engineering work arxJ the FEIS. 
It will define the project costs for the defined buildout schedule. 



Track & Stations 
Systems 

Yard & Shop 
Operating Ran 

Traffic 

Vehicles 

Capital Cost Estimates 

Operating Cost Estimate 



Complete P.E. 

Applied to system and performarKe 

specification outlines complete. 

Complete P.E. 

Complete for 20% and 1 st year of operation. 

This will include definition of operating entity. 

Traffic Management Plan complete. 

Complete performance specification. 

Complete including annual requirements 

based on buildout schedule. 

Complete for 20% and 1 st year of operation. 



The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requires completion of the Final 
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) before entering into a Full Funding Grant 
Agreement (FFGA). The FEIS documents and demonstrates that comprehensive 
consideration has been paid to the present and future effects of the project in 
terms of tfie natural environment, the community, financial impact and 
alternatives to the peesent plan. The process lor completing the FEIS includes 
submitting, for FTA review, a draft of each chapter of the document according 
to the following scfiedule: 



December 1992: 



AprH 1993: 



May 1993: 

June 1993: 
July 1993: 



FEIS and Environmental Analysis Work Program 
FEIS Report Outline 
Ridership Methodology Report 

Submit drafts to FTA 
Purpose ar>d Need (Chapter 1 ) 
Alternatives Considered (Chapter 2) 
Affected Environment (Chapter 3) 
Response to Comments (Chapter 7) 
Section 106 Review (Chapter 8) 
Section 4(f) Statement (Chapter 9) 

Transportation Impacts (Chapter 41 
Environmental Consequences 

Evaluation of Alternatives/Financial (Chapter 6) 

Submit Complete FEIS (including comments/revisions from 
FTA review of drafts) 



FULL FUNDING 

AGREEMENT The FTA must complete a Record of Decision on the FEIS before executing a 
FFGA. However, negotiations and paperwork for the FFGA may begin as early 
as June or July of 1 993. so that a Record of Decision and FFGA may both occur 
in September. 



2537 




2538 



c 

5 



> I 

a i - 

i . - 

'I I 

t r s 

1^1 



III 



5 : e 



If 



ee ^ 



u 

J 

OL 


z 

K 
OL 



il 

ii 

lit 

r := S, 

13 2 

^ ae M) 



I I 

III 

fit 

II ii 

y £■ ^ * 






3 

If 

5§ 



>• 

h 

5 
z 

P 
z 



u 



^1! I i nil 



diU. I 



J 



£ j I 

'SlIJ ill lll''l 
JUli ill f^f ;': 



Jii! 



il il !l„ i 



I II 



Kii 






I > il 1! I 



I 2o s 



t! II .u 



'I ! 



I iJ! ill llii 111 



!ii lllli! 



J!!l!l 



1' % h 

il Sit It! 



I 



pi I i<ii. 
iUil 



llJiinliilill 



In? 



3i 

si 



\ I ill: 



1 lil mm I 



{li!!iillf[lii' 



\\\ 



' W mm ilm 



\\\\\\\llWii\ 

irifi 3& 35 34 as? 



It 1 



^i II Slii iht i 
!> iMl! . I 




I iJiMifllillli lli^llilllll! 



M 

K 

o 

o 

K 
B 


u 



■ 
J _ 

z « " 

»= S < 
25; 

i 



K O X 
0. Z U 



>■ 

H 
Ul 

K 

5 



K 
O 

< 
J 
3 
U 

a 



< 

u 

K 
< 
J 
< 

a 

z 
u 
U 


o 
< 
u 

z 
u 

II 
O 

>• 
I- 



2539 





iOX 



CZ) 



CD 




(ID 



CCJ 



-*i 



.?fci 



i = 




ii 



^y 



Jt 



»' 




ti 



% 


l 'i ? 
5 5 5 


i 


-a 




c 
o 

< 

« u 
u « 

— * 

Z 

w 

KJ 




X 

1 1 

II 

a. 








J 




X 




1 




» 




! 




! 




1 




J 




J^ 




« 


{|: 


! 




1 : 

fl 




lit 1 



2540 

METRA COMMUTER RAIL 
STATEMENT OF JEFFREY R. LADD, CHAIRMAN 

Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, thank you for this opportunity to testify 
on our funding request. I am Jeffrey R. Ladd, Chairman of the Commuter Rail Service 
Board in Chicago, Icnown as Metra. 

I am happy to have the chance to discuss our request for Section 3 funds to start up 
new commuter rail service on the currently freight-only tracks of Wisconsin Central 
Railroad. The map shows the route. We have also included maps in your individual 
copies of lengthier detailed testimony. 

We are here to request a Section 3 earmark of $20.6 million to supplement other local 
and federal funds to begin construction immediately on a 53 mile rail service extension 
on the Wisconsin Central line in northeast Illinois. 

The Section 3 funds, combined with $21.5 million in Congestion Mitigation and Air 
Quality (CMAQ) monies, and $39.2 million of state and local funds will allow start up 
of a new rail line between Antioch in northwestern Lake County and Franklin Park in 
western Cook county continuing to downtown Chicago's Union Station. Of the $81 .4 
million total cost, only 51.8% would be federal money and only 25.3% would be 
Section 3 funds. The federal funds will be used for engineering, track improvements, 
signalization, and railroad yard improvements. 

There is nothing complicated about what we propose to do. Manpower, materials and 
management are readily available for efficient implementation. We are ready. 

The Wisconsin Central project enjoys broad support in northeast Illinois. Our request 
for federal funding is as much a citizens' petition as it is an agency application. 



2541 



Mr. Chairman, not only do our future potential customers want Metra service on 
Wisconsin Central tracks; they have convinced their local elected officials that they 
are willing to make a substantial part of the investment. One by one, the eleven 
municipalities along the line have been coming forward with commitments. 

The Village of Mundelein put the matter to a referendum, and by a two-to-one margin 
the voters said they were willing to spend as much as $2.5 million for station and 
parking projects. The Village of Buffalo Grove has already built a commuter parking 
lot. Commuters park there and take shuttle buses to existing rail lines, but Buffalo 
Grove built that lot right next to Wisconsin Central tracks, where they want to build 
a train station. We have included in your detailed testimony leners and resolutions 
of support by all the municipalities, transportation organizations and state 
representatives. They have accepted the fact that unless the local governments 
assume responsibility for stations and parking lots, the reality of commuter service 
again becomes remote. They have even formed a Wisconsin Central Mayoral Task 
force in order to sustain grass roots support. 

It's not just the municipalities. The State of Illinois, through revenue bonds backed 
by a gasoline tax increase, paid every penny of the cost of the locomotives that will 
be used on the route. The passenger coaches that will be used are coaches that 
Metra already owns. The several brand-new coaches~the ones that meet Congress' 
mandate for wheelchair accessibility-are already contracted for and are being built 
with Illinois funds, not federal dollars. 

And this is not the typical "new start" because the tracks are already there. That is 
why FTA proposed to treat this as an extension of service within the new start 
category. In short, the $42.1 million federal investment in what will be a 53-mile, full 
service route, is probably the lowest cost-per-mile start up rail project on record. 



2542 



As I have stated, this project is ready to go to construction immediately. We at Metra 
have studied this corridor for many years. Aii studies and evaiuations show that this 
project wiil have an excelient ridership- 5,400 weelcday passenger trips in the first 
year and two-thirds of total ridership will be diverted from automobiles. Commuters 
that are diverted to the new service from other Metra lines will free up additional seats 
and parking spaces on the currently congested C&NW Northwest and the Milwaukee 
North lines. In addition, it is projected that the Wisconsin Central line will have a 
farebox recovery ratio of 60.9% which would make it one of the highest in the 
country. 

I believe we have something here that sets our request apart from a traditional 
commuter rail, employment-related service. As the map shows, this will be a 
commuter rail line with direct access to O'Hare Airport, a destination that needs all 
the public transportation it can get. Again this year it ranks as the busiest airport in 
the United States. Because we are centrally located, O'Hare is the source of 
thousands of one-day business trips: Washington and back. New York and back, 
Detroit and back, St. Louis and back. The Chicago Department of Aviation tells us 
that roughly 30% of their market originations come from north and northwest of the 
airport. Indeed, the Federal Railroad Administration has already advanced preliminary 
funding to study a station there that would be used both by Wisconsin Central trains 
as well as intercity rail service. 

I believe the Wisconsin Central project is consistent with this committee's goals of 
addressing the changing transportation needs of major metropolitan areas as the 21st 
century approaches. It will serve the traditional Metra suburb-to-Chicago market- 
maintaining the viability of the Chicago Business District (CBD). And, it will mitigate 
traffic congestion and improve air quality by serving the emerging suburb-to-suburb 
and reverse commute markets. 



2543 



Mr. Chairman, I submit that this couid be a showcase for the nation because it is a 
sound investment by local government, by a regional public service agency, by state 
government, AND for the federal government. 

Here's the summary, Mr. Chairman: 

• Not a new start 

• Very low cost-per-mile for federal government 

• Ready to go now 

• A high farebox recovery ratio 

• Strong local participation 

• Strong state participation 

• Two-thirds currently drive. Cut pollution 

• Opportunity at O'Hare. 

Nothing could demonstrate better to other metropolitan areas across the nation that 
a partnership such as this is the cost-effective way to go. 

That concludes my formal statement, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for this 
opportunity to be with you today to discuss extension of Metra commuter 
rail service over the tracks of the freight-only Wisconsin Central Railroad. 
I am Jeffrey R. Ladd, Chairman of the Commuter Rail Service Board in 
northeast Illinois. 

Let me note at the outset that the Commuter Rail Service Board is the 
public agency responsible for the activities of the Northeast Illinois 
Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation. We do virtually all of our 
business under the service mark "Metra", and I will use that designation 
throughout. Also in the area of nomenclature, the part of the Wisconsin 



2544 



Central over which we propose to operate is entirely within the State of 
Illinois. The end-of-line overnight storage yard that we will be 
constructing is located at the state line, in Antioch, Illinois, but that's as 
close as we will get. We are not going into Wisconsin. 

One of the reasons for Metre's continuing fiscal stability is our dedicated 
sources of funding to cover operating expenses. While we get about 58- 
percent of our costs from customers who pay for the service, the other 
42-percent comes from a modest surcharge on the state sales tax in the 
territory we serve. In other words, we are paid for by the people who 
ride the trains and the people whose property values are kept high thanks 
to the existence of commuter rail in their communities. Property values 
are a key concern in the suburbs, and the folks along the Wisconsin 
Central route are aware what will happen to the values in their 
communities once train service begins. The other side of that coin is that 
we would not extend service into Wisconsin (where we certainly do not 
have the ability to level a tax!) unless an appropriate financing 
arrangement could be worked out. I should note that the 58% recovery 
ratio is what we accomplished in 1992. Currently, we are achieving a 
ratio of almost 62%. We are required, under Illinois law, to achieve 55% 
of our operating costs from our customers. 

Attached to this testimony is a map of the route. We have also included 
other Metre routes in the general area of Lake and Cook Counties, as well 
as the country roads on an east-west orientation that are now being used 
by commuters to access those existing commuter lines. Also included are 
the expressways and toll roads that have often become the last resort for 
commuters in the Wisconsin Central trafficshed because they can't find 
sufficient all-day parking along established rail routes. 

There are three distinct sets of demographics along the Wisconsin 
Central. The northern third is where Illinois farmers used to grow a lot of 
corn and soybeans; now the major crop is families. Residential 



2545 



development in central and north Lake County over the past decade has 
been immense. So is highway congestion. 

The second segment-the middle third-is territory that has long consisted 
of traditional "commuter" suburbs. The distances to existing rail lines are 
not great, but travel time at rush hour can average as little as 5 miles an 
hour; and opportunities for all-day parking at existing stations are 
becoming increasingly difficult to provide. Those communities grew up 
around their rail stations, and added parking lots would simply displace 
downtown businesses. 

The suggestion that multi-level decked parking is the answer is, generally, 
rejected by the communities. They work very hard to retain a suburban 
"look", and it is only in rare instances-in the most built-up communities— 
that we have been able to construct modest commuter parking garages. 
Beyond community resistance is the fact that our rule-of-thumb for 
commuter parking is to try to keep construction costs at about $2,500 
per space. That is impossible with a decked structure. 

Also considered is the matter of feeder buses. It must be remembered 
that they would be in the same 5-mile-an-hour traffic. It is wishful 
thinking to assume that if 35 commuters are on a feeder bus, there will 
be 35 fewer cars on the road. Just as nature abhors vacuums, 
automobiles abhor unused traffic lanes. In northeast Illinois, at least, 
every time they add a lane to an expressway they get two lanes worth of 
extra traffic in a very short time. 

Feeder buses are also a difficult "sell" if they take circuitous routes. 
Someone who knows he lives 10-minutes from the train station is quickly 
discouraged if his neighborhood's feeder bus wanders from cul-de-sac to 
cul-de-sac accumulating a full load, resulting in a 30-minute ride to the 
train. Feeder buses have been effective at Metra when they originate at 
the front door of a condo complex, and then run non-stop to the station. 
In other scenarios, they attract few. This may be because federal 



2546 



guidelines suggest that school buses be used as feeder buses. We have 
found that typical commuters simply do not want to start the workday 
the same way their children do. 

It is our firm conviction, supported by several years and many volumes of 
market research (samples attached) that in this middle "traditional 
commute" zone of Wisconsin Central we will generate respectable 
ridership levels provided the communities develop sufficient at-station 
parking for their constituents. This is exactly what they propose to do. 

The third segment of Wisconsin Central, prior to making the connection 
to Metra-owned tracks for the final run into Chicago, is the area along the 
east border of O'Hare International Airport. O'Hare is a destination that 
needs all the public transportation it can get. As you know, O'Hare has 
once again been named the busiest airport in the United States. Because 
of Chicago's central location, O'Hare is the source of thousands of one- 
day business trips: Washington and back, Detroit and back, St. Louis and 
back. New York and back. The Chicago Department of Aviation tells us 
that roughly 30% of their market originations are from north and 
northwest of the airport. For those travelers to now access O'Hare by 
public transportation, they would have to ride Metra into Chicago and 
then reverse themselves and ride the CTA train back to O'Hare. This is 
an option few seem to use. Rather, they pay the price of a limousine, get 
a family member to fight traffic and drive them to O'Hare, or they drive 
themselves and pay $15 a day to park. We think the potential for 
Wisconsin Central service to an extension of the new Airport Transit 
System for a ride direct to the terminals is extremely good. We intend to 
market the feature heavily and sell the product effectively. Metra has no 
problem carrying business people with briefcases; we do it every day. 
We are not looking at this two-seat service as catering to families with 8 
suitcases heading off on a two- week vacation. That group will continue 
to support O'Hare's extensive limousine services. We do not feel that we 
will be taking business away from anyone; the projected growth in air 
travel means there will be plenty of business for everyone. 



2547 



Beyond those three distinctive geographical marketsheds for Wisconsin 
Central service, each of which gives us a major opportunity to help get 
single-passenger vehicles off the highway, there is a long list of 
incremental bonuses for our non-attainment region-not the least of which 
is the reverse commute potential. Attached to this testimony is a list of 
companies at or close to Wisconsin Central tracks that have 1 00 or more 
employees. As you know, the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act 
will require that they cut substantially the number of employees driving 
themselves (and no one else) to work. This challenge is being discussed 
at meetings and forums areawide under the auspices of the Chicago Area 
Transportation Study (CATS) the M-P-0 for northeast Illinois, as well as 
by the Illinois Department of Transportation, by various TMAs (Traffic 
Management Associations) established by industries in particular 
corridors, and by various intergovernmental groups such as Mayors and 
Managers Associations. 

I have attached several newsclips regarding the stipulations of the Clean 
Air Act amendments and their impact on the Wisconsin Central 
marketshed. While the first response may be simple car-pooling, several 
of the largest employers have already indicated to us informally that they 
are considering private company-owned shuttles that will meet trains to 
pick up employees. This is already happening in downtown Chicago. 
Two hospitals and one University run employee shuttles between 
downtown rail terminals and their Outer Business Ring locations 
exclusively for their employees who live in the suburbs. Long before the 
Clean Air Act came into play, they determined that they simply did not 
have the real estate available for employee parking and that at the 
hospitals, the decked parking was necessary for outpatients and visitors. 

While it is impossible to predict with certainty the precise scope of the 
reverse commute potential, it must be remembered that the trains will be 
going in that direction anyway. We work as hard as we can to get 
multiple daily trips from our trainsets; indeed, the initial fleeting on 
Wisconsin Central will consist of only three trains. But with those three 



2548 



sets we will get at least 8 rush hour trains and several midday-and 
perhaps evening-trains as well. If they can carry fare-paying reverse 
commuters on their way back to the railhead, that's a bonus. The trains 
were going out there anyway. Again, this is a service that we will market 
with enthusiasm and impact. It represents excellent revenue potential 
with minimum added cost. 

All of the aforementioned— the three identifiable market zones plus the 
strong potential for a reverse commute bonus-are what one might call 
the "hardware" of our proposal. But the request for federal participation 
stands on more than just the nuts and bolts. Mr. Chairman, there is 
something going on here that goes well beyond a commuter rail system 
seeking to expand into a territory where consultants and experts say the 
potential ridership is very good. Metre commuter rail is a public service. 
And in Wisconsin Central territory the public is asking for this service. 
Our request for federal funding is as much a citizens' petition as it is an 
agency application. 

Not only do our future potential customers want Metre service; they have 
convinced their local elected officials that they are willing to make a 
substantial part of the investment. One by one. the eleven municipalities 
along the route are beginning to come forward with commitments. They 
have accepted the fact that unless the local governments assume 
responsibility for the stations and parking lots, the reality of commuter 
service again becomes remote. They even have formed a Wisconsin 
Central Mayoral Task Force in order to sustain grassroots support. 

Let's look at the proposed financial package to get an understanding of 
what is truly a precedent-setting amount of local share for an undertaking 
of this size. I direct your attention to the attachment marked "Wisconsin 
Central Funding Plan." Of immediate interest to the Committee, I 
presume, i.s the earmark that we seek in the Federal Transit 
Administration Section 3 appropriation. It's the second box from the left 
on the bottom-$20,595,200. 



2549 



All told. Implementation of service on Wisconsin Central will require just 
over $80 million from federal, state and local sources. By itself, that is 
not an unreasonable investment for a public transportation system that 
will stretch more than 50 miles from the center city into an area that 
needs the service. New light rail in Baltimore cost well over $300 million 
for a 32-mile route. The Los Angeles subway-some 4.5 miles in length- 
cost well over $2 billion . For Wisconsin Central, the federal government 
can participate at a cost of well under a million dollars a mile. Of the 
$81.4 million total cost, only 51.8% would be federal money. $21.5 
million of that has already been approved under the CMAQ process. The 
people who will use and benefit from the service will put up 48.2% of the 
cost. The overall breakdown is included in the Funding Plan chart. 

You will see from the footnote that it is not just the municipalities who 
bolster this partnership. The State of Illinois, through revenue bonds 
backed by a gasoline tax increase, paid every penny of the cost of the 
locomotives that will be used on the route. The passenger coaches that 
will be used are coaches that Metra already owns. The several brand- 
new coaches-the ones that meet the Congressional mandate for 
wheelchair accessibility under the Americans with Disabilities Act-are 
already contracted for and are being built with Illinois funds, not federal 
dollars. 

This is not a typical "new start", of course, because the tracks are 
already there. But in the minds of the commuters in communities along 
that route, "new" is definitely the operative word. Because it is an 
addition of commuter trains onto tracks now used only by freight trains, 
our early advice from FTA is that this will be an extension of service 
rather than a new start. But to the taxpayers of northeast Illinois, this 
has "new" written all over It. 

Mr. Chairman, Committee staff has forwarded several questions that they 
specifically asked be addressed in this testimony. That material is also 



2550 



attached, at the back of your packages. I would draw specific attention 
to several of the items: 

Official forecasts-from our Regional Planning Commission-indicate that 
population in the affected region will grow 21.9% between 1990 and 
2010. Growth in the number of households is even greater for that same 
time period"32%. The difference between the two would indicate that 
the ratio of working-age adults to children (who usually aren't commuters) 
will change. Confirming that supposition is the forecast that employment 
in the Wisconsin Central corridor will increase by 23% during that time 
frame. That means more rush hour work-related commuting-on a 
highway system that is already inadequate at rush hours and shows little 
hope for improvement without serious collateral social costs such as 
pollution and more congestion. 

One other data sheet I would single out is the one marked Financial & 
Ridership Data. I mentioned at the outset that Metra-overall-generates 
about a 58% farebox recovery ratio on the present 1 1 routes. Our very 
conservative estimates of ridership and revenue indicate that the 
Wisconsin Central service will generate more than 60% of its costs from 
the farebox. That is in keeping with our current performance, and well- 
above the 55% requirement. 

I would also draw the Committee's attention to one more chart in the 
appendix—the one entitled "Comparative Cost-Effectiveness." As you can 
see, from the day the first crowds show up to ride, Metra's Wisconsin 
Central service will be an industry pace-setter. It will be a paragon. It 
will be a jewel in our crown. It will be a standard for all others to 
emulate. 

I appreciate this opportunity to present our case. 



2551 



MMefiyt WISCONSIN 
/VmM3=. CENTRAL LINE 


Proposed Slalion Locations: 


1 
2 
3 
4 
5 


OHare Airport 
Devol (Des Plnines) 
Prospect Heights 
Wtieeling 
Buffalo Grove 


6 


Lincolnsliire 


7 


Vernon Hills 


8 


A/lundelein 


9 
10 


Grayslal<e/Llbertyville 
Round Lal<e Beacli 


11 


Lal<e Villa 


12 


Aniiocli 







\:,;-l'- «■■•-l:;PJ•':i■ 
y.-it- ■•;\|%s*4> 



2552 



Zll 




<1 




-II 




0.1 




oil 


o 
o 


Zl' 


o 




^ 


Q! 


o 


Zl 


* 


3 
u. 


$81 


-1 




< 




OC 




1- 




z 


H 


UJ 


W 


C) 


O 




o 


z 
z 


OTAL 


c 


1 1- 



--- • '-- 




# 


# se 5f 


»* 1 






^ 


o 
o 


o o ^ 

g S U5 


» 






_l 


o 


O CO <o 


CO 






< 


o 


CM f «) 


•* 






O 












o 










1 


-1 


■ 








* 

_l 


o 


8 3 5 


i 




-J 
I* 

o 

^- 


UJ 

o 

Ui 
u. 


o 


o (O n 
CO m « 


in 




O 


§ 

o 


o o o 

8 8 8 


o 
g 






z 

o 
z 


8 

v» 


5,720 
54,244 
20,940 


o 
■* 






3 






M 






u. 














o 


o o o 

° 9 a 

o 00 O 


o 
o 

CO 






1* 


8 

in 


* 00 o 

* « * 

^ a a> 


CM 

m 
eg 






O 


M 


^ m n 


O) 




►- 




tvj — 


M 




\ 


X 

o 


o 
o 
o 


o o 

8 8 


o 1 

o 
o 




1 < 


t- 
< 

2 - 


1 


o o 

8 2 


o 

0> 




?, 


1 5S 




(O eg 


CO 

eg 




! O 


(T 






M 




-" 


UJ 

> 

O 














3 8 8 

5 CO o 


O 
O 










eo 






z 
o 

»- 




1,144 
7,648 
1,750 


eg' 
in 
o 








«» 


v» 




— 






o o o 

8 s i 


o 
o 

<M 






_J 

< 




!£ S 8 


r~- 






y- 




K S) o 


^- 






o 




■w o ^- 


M 






1- 




•» r> 


M 






i^ — 


Q 


2 






n 




Q 


o 




-J 






(^ 


N 




^ 


z 
o , 




s 


U in 




n ui 

U. 


5' 

UJ 




in 


Si 










III 


o 

g 






o 

< 

o 




$4,576, 

10,000 

7,000 


m 




" 


J_ 




n 






1 


« 




0) 








e 




>- 








>- 




u. 


_i 






c 




^ f t t 


o 






c 
u. 




OC u. u. u. 
O 

£ 






= 


11 


a. 


11 


J 



S88 

o o o 


^% 


8d;$ 

in •- o> 


8§ 

S (O 


•♦ Vr- 


2S 









Q 




















^ 




















09 




















a 


<a 










3 










O 








2 e 

= a 


a 








E o 

E in 


TJ 

c 




c 




"1 

B O 


in 




a 
c 




o 

c 




5 




oii 
•o « 


o 




c 




w > 




















o — 


- 




u 




o 1 

a o 


otives 
he St 




« 




t: O 




o 
c 

c 
o 
F 




11 

o >• 


ectric locom 
facilities by t 
antral cornd 




• 




" -^ 




a. 
6 






el-e 
cess 




o 




10 u c 




* 
? 




a >• 
£ a 


eddie 
and a 




c 


bi 


a o 


?^'!! 




■o 


c 


c — 


5 i ™ 




a 


« 


"» / 








2 o 


- Q. 5 




e 




c o 


CO . O 




9 


o 


O -r- 


U r- IB 








a_ 


ur(4) lo 
f statio 
seated 




•> 


<B 


o to 




■o 


f 






c 
2 


C 

o 


Si 




c 
a 


O 
(0 
Id 
a 


m O 


on of fo 
uctlon c 
jnltles 1 




z 




c a 


o « E 




«o 

c 
o 


c 
o 

a 

e 


Tech 
Utillz 
Utiliz 
Con 
com 




?? 


(0 ^ 6 TJ 




a 












§ 


















a 


a 








■o 


u 








o 


o 






w 


u. 


_i 






UJ 




^^ 






H 


^ 


w 






o 










z 











2553 



WISCONSIN CENTRAL FUNDING PLAN: WITHOUT OVERMATCH 



TOTAL COST: $52,714,000 



FY 93 



FY 94 



FY 95 



CMAO 


SECTION 3 


WQAl 


TOTAL 


$ 4,576,000 


-0- 


$ 1,144.000 


$ 5.720.000 


$10,000,000 


$20,59S,200» 


$ 7.648.800 


S38.244.000 


$ 7,000.000 


-0- 


$ 1,750,000 


S 8.750,000 



TOTAL 



$21,576,000 $20,595,200 



$10,542,800 $52,714,000 



* Federal Section 3 New Start funds needed in FY94 to implement service on the Wisconsin Central line. 



Wisconsin Central Proposal 

Studies Funded by Metre 



Soo Line Feasibility Study - R.L. Banks (86) 
Antioch Site Environmental Review - Donohue (92) 
Libertyville/Grayslake Sta Site Review - Techknow (92) 



$186,000 

15,338 

3.714 

$205,052 



Wisconsin Central Service Proposal 

Studies and Reports Listed in Chronological Order 



Study of New and Replacement Rail Transit Alternatives 
Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) 
August 1978 

The purpose of this effort was to develop a system plan for the 
Chicago metropolitan area's rapid transit and commuter rail network. 
Included among proposed new commuter rail lines was service on the 
Soo Line between Antioch and Oes Plaines. 



2554 



Year 2000 Transportation System Development Plan 

Chicago Transportation Study (CATS) 

September 1980 (updates to Plan were made in 1981 and 1983) 

Northeast Illinoiss multimodal plan, intended to guide investments 
of transportation funds over a twenty-year timeframe. The plan was 
endorsed by the Policy Committee of CATS and the Regional 
Transportation Authority (RTA), and adopted by the Northeastern 
Illinois Planning Commission (NIPC). The commuter rail component of 
the Plan contained the recoimiendation for service on the Soo Line 
from Mundelein in Lake County to Des Plaines in Cook County. 

Feasibility Study Commuter Rail Service on the Soo Line Railroad 

R.L. Banks & Associates, Inc.; in conjunction with JHK & Associates and CATS 

December 1986 

Study commissioned by Metra to assess the feasibility of instituting 
commuter rail service in the Soo Line corridor. The investigation 
concluded that the most cost-effective service would involve 
operating diesel-propelled gallery cars on two segments of the Soo, 
including: 1) between Mundelein and downtown Chicago via a 
connection at Deval with the C&NW Northwest Line and 2) between 
Antioch and downtown Chicago via a connection at Grayslake with the 
Milwaukee North 1 ine. 

Atlas of Potential Rail Service Corridors 
Metra Office of Planning 
June 1987 

Prepared as part of the Proposal for an Expanded Planing Framework 
at Metra . the Wisconsin Central service was included among seventeen 
future commuter rail corridors. 

Year 2010 Transportation System Development Plan 
Chicago Transportation Study (CATS) 
June 1990 

The Plan describes improvements necessary to meet the travel needs 
of northeast Illinois between 1990 and 2010. The TSD meets federal 
long range planning guidelines, continuing the region's eligibility 
for federal transportation funding. The plan was endorsed by the 
Policy Committee of CATS and the Regional Transportation Authority 
(RTA), and adopted by the Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission 
(NIPC). The commuter rail component of the Plan contained the 
recommendation for service on the Soo Line from Mundelein in Lake 
County to Des Plaines in Cook County. 

Wisconsin Central Corridor Commuter Rail Service - Project Proposal 
Metra Office of Planning 
October 1990 

This document updated the previously prepared R.L. Banks study, 
especially from the perspective of community work on siting 
stations. This report also acknowledged that the location for the 
outlying storage facility recommended as part of the R.L. Banks 
study (i.e., the existing freight yard at the junction with the 
EJ&E) was no longer available for passenger vehicle use. Based on 
a review of alternative sites, the proposal to develop a yard in 
Antioch was put forth. 



2555 



Proposed Regional Rail Facility Serving the Wise Cntrl and Hilw-North 
Village of Libertyvllle Planning Department 
March 1992 

Report explores the costs and benefits associated with developing a 
station faclility near the junction of the proposed Wisconsin 
Central Line and Metra's Milwaukee North Line. 

Environmental Evaluation Report - Proposed Antioch Yard Site 
Oonohue - Engineers, Architects 4 Scientists 
March 1992 

This work was commissioned by Hetra to provide environmental and 
community data with which to evaluate the feasibility of 
constructing a rail storage yard at a site proposed in Antioch, 
Illinois. 

Future Agenda for Suburban Transportation (FAST) 
Metra & Pace 
April 199Z 

This Jointly prepared long range plan included the revised and 
expanded proposal to serve O'Hare Airport by routing trains via the 
Milwaukee West Line. 

Proposed Wisconsin Central Libertyville/Gravslake Station Location Review 
TechKnow Engineers 
September 1992 

Study reviews three alternative station locations in the 
Libertyville/Grayslake area. 

Congestion Mitiqation & Air Quality Improvement Program 

Metra 

February 1993 

Included In Metra's application for 1993 CMAQ funding was a request 
for start-up funding for Wisconsin Central service. The funding 
proposal was predicated on a reassignment of existing rolling stock 
that was made possible by other recent investments. 

CHAP - Technical Summary of Proposed Projects 

CATS 

February 1993 

Presents a technical evaluation of all CMAQ proposed projects in 
1993. Funding for partial Wisconsin Central start-up was granted. 



2556 



Wisconsin Central Proposal 

Financial & Ridership Data 



Capital Costs (in OOP's) 

Metra $65,404 

Community 16,000 

Total $81 ,404 

Annual Operating Cost (in OOO's) $6,103 

Annual Psnqr Revenue (in OOO's)* $3,718 

Annual Operating Deficit (in OOO's) $2,385 

Weekday Boardings** 5,400 



'Revenues are based on avg 1992 ticket sales by zone. Given the potential for serving 
air travelers accessing G'Hare, who will be less likely to use commutation tickets, 
this assumption probably results in low revenue estimates. 

••Represents forecast of total daily boardings (i.e., one-way trips) in 1998. 



2557 



Wisconsin Central Proposal 

Comparative Cost- Effectiveness 

Actual* Forecast** 

Operating Cost Per Psgr Trip 

Metra System $4.41 

Wisconsin Central $4.43 

CalTrain $4.58 

Long Island RR $6.58 

Tri-Rail Fla $7.02 

Metro North $7.14 

Deficit Per Passenger Trip 

Metra System $1.69 

Wisconsin Central $1.73 

Metro North $2.89 

CalTrain $3.03 

Long Island RR $3.22 

Tri-Rail Fla $5.51 

Revenue/Cost 

Metra System 61.8% 

Wisconsin Central 60.9% 

Metro North 59.5% 

Long Island RR 55.1% 

CalTrain 33.9% 

Tri-Rail Fla 21.5% 

•1991 FTA Section 15 Report Data. 
••Based on ridership forecast for 1998. 



2558 



Wisconsin Central Proposal 
Regional Impacts 



Annual Diverted Auto Tn'ps 1 ,449,675 

Annual Vehicle Miles Reduced 25,727,312 

Annual Tons of Emissions Reduced 

Volatile Organic (VOC) 79.9 

Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) 66.8 



Source: 



Chicago Area Transf>ortation Study — 

Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Improvement Program 



Wisconsin Central Corridor Forecasts 

Population, Households & Employment 

1990 2010 Change % Change 

Population 418,888 510.469 91.581 21.9% 

Households 152,917 201,863 48,946 32.0% 

Employment 303,452 372,708 69,256 22.8% 



The Wisconsin Central Corridor was defined by the expected market area of station 
park-n-ride access, which was based on observed behavior of current Metra riders. 
The delineated corridor was approximately six miles (3 miles on each side) at the 
southern end of the Line, and broadened to roughly twelve miles at the northern end. 

Data Source: Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission 



2559 



C 

o 

a 
o 

CL 

75 
a. 

o 

C 
3 



I 
O 

• ■IB 

o 

o 

2 

*- 

c 
o 

O 

c 

"S 

c 
o 
o 

(0 



1 


O) 


o 


O) ^ y- in 


co 


CM N. 00 


^ 


^ CM CO r>- ^ 


C3) 




CM 




^ in CO 


r^ 


^ in in 


CTJ '" 


in CM CD 


CD 


:« CM 




•»- 


CO "^ 




CO 


c 


"t CM 


CO 


1* o> 
















cm" 


■O 0) 


















! © T- 


















! a 


















! M 


















1 M 


















i "*• 


CO 


CM 


CM CO -^ 1- 


^ 


O 1- -r- 


^ 


O 00 T- CO CM 


CM 


1 M 


o 


CM 


T- CO CO 


CM 


•t CO C3) 


CO "^ 


1- CD CO 


OO 


'lo; 


■*" 


■^ 


1- CO 




CM 


"c 


T- CM 


0O_ 


^ o> 


• 
















O T- 


















a. 


















O) 


















c 


CO 


^ 


OO CO CM o 


CO 


CM C3) O) 


m O* 


OO CO CM r^ "t 


CO 


^ 


in 


00 


cj) in in 


CO 


r^ o r>. 


(0 .,— 


CO 1- t- CM 


r^ 


•= o 




■^ 


T— 




T- CO 


c 


y- CM 


OO 


5 S 
















^ 


CQ 0* 




















^ 


85 


S5 S5 ^ ^ 


85 


^ 85 85 


85 85 


0^ ^ ^ 0^ ^ 


^ 


o 


CM 


C3) 


CO CO in T- 


00 


CM in rr 


^ Oi 


0> CM CO Cn CD 


o 


o 
c 


O 


CO 


C3 in C3 CD 


00 


CJ) in Tt 


in o6 


CO r^ CM in 00 


CM 


CO 


CO 


1 ^- 




CM CO CM 


<3) CM 


1 CM 1 in CM 


CM 


X! 


















« 


















c 


in 


h- 


co in 00 ^ 


^ 


OO o in 


r>. C3) 


T- ^ O) O) t— 


CD 


o 


o 


CM 


CJ CO 00 h* 

CM ■*_ C0_ T- 


CO 


CO rr 1- 


in CO 


CO CO 00 1- ^ 


CO 


'"5 o 




'I- 


C3) 


o r-. CM 


00 CM 


0> «* t- CO CJ) 


CO 


iS 0) 


CO 


co" 


CO 00 h~ O) 


-t" 


oo" '*" t-" 


cm" in" 


Oi co" r-" in a>" 


o' 


3 0> 




CO 


in T- ■>- 




CM 


T— 


f- T- ".- CM 


CO 


Q.'- 
















CM 


o 


















a. 




















en 


o 


00 N. o o 


T- 


O CO CO 


CM CO 


OO 1- 00 N. CD 


CD 






CO 


CO O CO CM 


in 


CM 1- in 


CD CM 


CD CM in CM CO 


CD 


o 


5 


CM 


in in CM in 


r- 


CM O O 


Tt oo_ 


C0_ C7) -"t 00_ CM_ 


o 


00 
0) 


^' 


cm" 


co" nT in co" 


"«^" 


co' cm" n." 


T— T- 


O" cm" T-" CD" CO 


o" 




CM 


in t- T- 






■^ 


1- T- t- CM 


CO 


















CM 



< 

Q. 



> 
O 



= O .E 



o eg 

■•J3 ^ 

C 3 

< m 



«:i«^c-i0©> ©CD 
°-^ %%9.S c^^ - ^- 



£ c5 



C7) 

c 



3 
CD 



> 

3 
C/D 

75 
-o 

U. 

"O) 
CQ 
*. _ 

« 



3 

c 

O 
<» 

sz 



3 
(0 

(U 

k. 

3 
CD 

« 



.c 








o 








CO 








a> 








m 






^ 


dLake 
er Park 


if 

c 


C3) 

c 


CO 

o 

1- 


c = 


o 


(D 
m 





82 2s.|c§3-^o>=-g-£ 
Dij_0_il3Jj_j2_iQ_a:a:w>> 



2560 



Wisconsin Central Corridor 
Summary of Major Employers 

Community Firms Employees 



Antioch 
Round Lake 
Grays lake 
Mundelein 
Libertyville 
Vernon Hills 
Buffalo Grove 
Wheeling 
Riverwoods 
Lincolnshire 
Prospect Heights 
Northbrook (partial) 
Long Grove 
Des Plaines 
Rosemont 
Schiller Park 
Franklin Park (partial) 
River Grove 



6 

1 

5 

16 

20 

10 

8 

46 

1 

14 

2 

6 

4 

97 

25 

29 

11 

4 



906 
2,500 
1,340 
5,075 

1 1 ,242 
1,920 
1,979 

1 1 ,990 
5,000 
9,700 
1,195 
7,716 
4,610 

33,056 

16,644 
4,832 
6,811 
3.000 



Total 



305 



1 29,51 6 



2561 



Wisconsin Central Corridor 

Companies with 100+ Employees 



Anlioch 



Advertiser 

Antioch Community High School 

Northlake Engineering, Inc 

Regal China Corp 

State Bank of Antioch 

Thelen Sand & Gravel, Inc 



Round Lake 



Baxter Healthcare Corp 



100 
190 
120 
250 
101 
145 



2,500 



Gravslake 




C.H.F Industries 


100 


College of Lake County 


890 


Intrupa Manufacturing Co. 


100 


State Oil Co. 


100 


Surgipath Medical Industries 


150 


Mundelein 




Baxter Diagnostics 


100 


Baxter- Pharmaseal 


375 


B G.T Landscape Co., Inc 


100 


Callaghan 


100 


Commercial Plastics 


125 


Oecorel 


500 


Oeringer Manufacturing Co 


200 


Kautt & Bux of America, Inc 


105 


IMC. Femilzer, Inc 


260 


MacLean-FoggCo 


1.100 


Medline Industries 


1.000 


Moore Response Marketing Services 


140 


National School Bus Service, Inc 


220 


Olmpic Packaging, Inc 


240 


Pitman- Moore, Inc 


400 


Samco Ltd 


110 


Libertwille 




Aldridge Electric Inc 


150 


American National Bank of Liberiyvilk 


132 


Bernard Chevrolet Inc 


100 


Bolander Construction Co.. Inc 


200 


Cambridge Homes 


110 


Commonwealth Edison 


2,000 


Condell Medical Center 


1.100 


Corcom Inc 


900 


Foulds, Inc 


125 


Gustafson Excavating. Inc 


100 


Hollister. Inc 


1,500 


Moore Response Marketing Services 


115 


Morion Manufacturing, Co 


1.000 


Motorola 


2.500 


Oneac Corporation 


200 


Onsrud Cutter, Inc 


110 


Ozlte Corporation 


120 


Solar Corporatk^n 


500 


U. S Gypsum Corp 


ISO 


Zeller Closures, Inc 


130 


Vernon Hills 




Cosmetique. Inc 


180 


Inlander- Stoindler Paper, Co 


210 


J & L Oil, Inc 


350 


North Suburban Clinic. Ltd 


100 


Omron Healthcare. Inc 


175 


Production Assoc. Ltd 


200 


Tempo Window Fashions. Inc 


100 


Viking Fire Protection Co 


300 


Wolf Medical Instruments Corp 


125 


Zebra Technologies Corp 


180 


Buffalo Grove 




Colfax Envelope Corp 


130 


Dellce Oe France. Inc 


260 


Landis & Gyr Powers. Inc 


700 


Merrill Chase Galleries 


160 


Mid-West Automation Systems. Inc 


175 


Ray CorporatK)n 


150 


Rentokil Tropical Plants. Inc 


300 


Stasbaugh Inc 


104 



Wheeling 

Abbott- Intertast Corp 

Acco International USA 

Allen & Co. 

Anderson Die Castings, Inc 

Brown & Kerr Inc 

Burrows Co 

Capitol Construction Group, Inc 

Clear Shield National, Inc 

Cole Taylor Bank 

Commercial Cam Co. Inc 

Contracting & Material Co 

Corpak, Inc 

Courtesy Mold & Tool 

Courtesy Plastics 

Crescent Cardboard Co 

C.S.T. Office Products, Inc 

Oearttorn Wire & Cable, Inc 

DeGraf Bros, Inc 

E.Z. Per Corp 

Ekco Products. Inc 

Engis Corp 

Falcon Jet Corp 

Fluid Power Systems 

H.V.R. Co. 

Handl-Foil Corp 

Harbll Manufacturing 

Hendricksen- The Care of Trees, 

Hydraforce, Inc 

Illinois Lock Co 

Kenny Construction Co., Inc 

Orval Kent Food Co., Inc 

Peer Brewing Co. 

Polyfoeim Packers Corp 

Priester Aviation Service 

Reslnlte Corp 

Rexnord, Inc. Seal Operation 

Segerdahl Corp 

SET. Environmental. Inc 

Spectrum Manufacturing, Inc 

Suburban Surgical Co., inc 

Taubensee Steel & Wire Co 

Tech Web. Inc 

Todd Chevrolet Inc 

United Model Distributors, Inc 

V-S Grinding Co., Inc 

Valspar Corp 

q iverwoods 

Commerce Clearing House, Inc 

Lincolnshire 

ABB Impell Corp 
Arrowhead Industrial Water 
Boots Pharmaceuticals, Inc 
Hewitt Associates 
IBG International. Inc 
International Jensen Inc 
Intenech Resources. Inc 
ITW Paslode 
Komatsu Dresser Co 
Marketing Force 
MDA Scientific Inc 
Quill Corp 

Vance Publishing Corp 
ZF of North America. Inc 

Prospect Heights 

Household International Inc 
Safeguard America. Inc 

Norlhbrook (ar ea s west) 
Allstate Insurance Co 
ANGUS Chemical Co 
Culllgan international 
Holiday Inn Crowne Plaza 
MRCA Information Services 
Nielsen Marketing Research 



Inc 



150 
500 
270 
175 
100 
200 
150 
200 
100 
250 
130 
150 
390 
390 
120 
270 
140 
100 
300 
800 
130 

1.200 
150 
150 
165 
200 
150 
100 
150 
500 

1.800 
100 
100 
200 
250 
150 
ISO 
120 
100 
100 
110 
3SS 
125 
ISO 
ISO 
250 



5.000 



400 
250 
100 

3.500 
100 
170 
350 
600 

2,200 
ISO 
250 

1.000 
350 
280 



920 
275 



5.500 
350 
700 
250 
116 
800 



2562 



Long Gfpva 

CF Industries. Inc 
Federal Kemper Life Assurance Co 
Lumbermens Mutual Casually Co 
National Lss Control Service Corp 

Pes Plaines 

AAA Chicago Motor Club 

Aargus Poly Bag Co. Inc 

Afco Products, Inc 

Austin Co 

Bake Line Products. Inc 

Banner Service Corp 

Bantum. Double Day, Dell 

Best Western 

Blair Industries 

Bradley Printing Co 

Brlnkman Instrument, Inc 

Butler Paper Co 

Cahners Publishing Co 

Calkins & Co 

Carpet Laying Services Inc 

Central Telephone Co o( III 

Chicago Faucet Co 

Cinerex Imaging Systems 

C-Lone Products. Inc 

Cloud Corp 

Contour Saws Inc 

Compugraphic Corp 

Concerned Care. Inc 

Danzas Corp 

Deluxe Check Printers Inc 

DeSoto. Inc 

Oes Plaines Putilishlng Co 

Oietzgen Corp 

Do All Co 

Dry Storage Corp 

Oynatech CommunictUlons. Inc 

Emery Worldwide 

Enline Inc 

First National Bank 0( Oes Plaines 

Forest Hospital 

Foster Co 

Qeonex 

Gerrard & Co 

GolNlew Development Center 

Graphics Arts Printing 

Health Foods. Inc 

Holiday Inn 

Holy Family Hospital 

Howe -Baker Engineers 

Hug Electronics 

Hughes Optical Products. Inc 

Hysan Corp 

IP M Co 

ITW/Fastex 

International Business Interiors. Inc 

Interstate Steel Co 

Juno Ughting, Inc 

Kar Products Inc 

Kester Solder Co 

LaMarche Mfg. Co 

Lawson Products 

Lee Auto Parts 

LeBrebvre Intergraphlcs 

Lift Pans Mfg Co 

Littlefuse. Inc 

Martin Brower Co 

Merkle-Koitr Industries 

Meyer Material Co 

Mid Central Food Sales. Inc 

Midwest Dental Products Corp 

Midwest Litho Arts. Inc 

Natl Assn of Independent Insurers 

National Liminatlon Co 

Neiman Loose Leaf Products Co 

North Suburban Mass Transit 

Nu-Oell Plastics Corp 

Nu-Way Industries 

Oakton Community College 

CXd World Trading Co 

Paper Express Ltd 

Prudential Preferred Properties 

Qualex Inc 



Des Plaines, cont 



1.450 


Revell inc 


350 


260 


Rogers & Co 


120 


2.600 


Sage Foods. Inc 


200 


300 


Sales Tools. Inc 


140 




Scott Container Products 


100 




Sealed Power Technologies 


100 


500 


Semrow Metal Corp 


100 


150 


Sound & Stagecraft 


100 


100 


Symons Corp 


800 


250 


Tanner Co 


1.700 


650 


Tash Inc 


300 


100 


Telecheck Chicago 


120 


200 


Teledyne Post 


500 


100 


Union Camp Corp 


122 


270 


UOP 


3.850 


100 


United Stationers. Inc 


600 


250 


Van Hygan & Smytha, Inc 


650 


110 


Wheaton Glass Co 


too 


600 


Wheels Inc 


425 


250 
100 


Xerox Corp 


450 


1.000 


Rosemont 




400 


Advance Transformer Co 


1.500 


102 


A.P V Crepaco. Inc 


1.000 


120 


Austin Consulting 


100 


200 


Barry & Assoc 


150 


200 


Bennett & Kahnweiler. Inc 


too 


100 


Central Slates Pension Fund 


1.000 


180 


Comdisco. Inc 


1,000 


100 


Continental Distributing Co 


400 


200 


DHL. Ainways. Inc 


250 


600 


Embassy Suites Hotel-Chicago OHi 


260 


160 


Hatfield Electric Co 


400 


250 


Hawthorn Realty Group 


too 


200 


Hoffman Electric Co.. Inc 


135 


1.400 


Hotel Sofltel 


100 


too 


Hyatt Regency OHare 


800 


400 


London House 


180 


too 


Marriott Corporate Services 


1.600 


130 


Marriott Suites- OHare 


200 


340 


Miles. Inc 


5.900 


500 


Norris Corp 


100 


185 


Prucare of Illinois 


109 


300 


Quest International 


210 


110 


Radisson Suite Hotel. OHare 


200 


too 


Ramada Hotel O Hare 


550 


too 


Sheraton International at OHare 


300 


100 






1.000 


Schiller Park 




200 


Acra Electric Corp. 


100 


150 


Amco Engineering Co 


350 


180 


Anchor Building Maintenance Co 


250 


200 


Atlas Lift Truck Rentals & Sales 


160 


175 


Atols Tool & Mold Corp 


145 


300 


Basler Co 


100 


300 


Bretford Manufacturing. Inc 


100 


200 


Ceico Industries 


160 


315 


Celli Trucking Co. 


100 


215 


Chicago Cardboard Products Co 


125 


200 


Continental Baking Co. 


320 


180 


Craftsman Custom Metal Fabricators 


too 


280 


Har Aerospace 


112 


120 


Hartwig Transit Inc 


235 


110 


Howard Johnson -OHare 


105 


125 


International Jensen. Inc 


200 


1.700 


Mayfair Molded Products Corp 
Midwest Cortland. Inc 


2S0 


150 


100 


300 


Montana Metal Products. Inc 


100 


700 


Paluch Co., Inc 


100 


172 


Porter Athletic Equipment Co. 


115 


250 


Residence Inn by Marriott 

Roa Design Eng neering & Mgmt Sen 


100 


125 


100 


175 


Sales Force Companies. Inc 


625 


210 


Square Co 


ISO 


120 


Steel Chemicals, Inc 


100 


250 


Whitso, Inc 


130 


100 


Wilton Tool 


100 


120 

1.000 

100 


Wisconsin Tool & Stamping Co. 


200 






100 






850 






150 







2563 



Franklin Park (firms w/350-t- only) 
Airtwrne Express Corp 
Bally Life Fitness 
BInks M(g Co 
BWD Aulomolive 
Castle & Co 
Duo-Fast Corp 
Feam International 
Nestle Foods Corp 



Reliance Comm/Tec 

350 Sloan Valve 

430 Thompson Steel Co 

960 

571 River Grove 

450 Chapco Carton Co 

1,200 Fort Lock Corp 

400 Triton College 

1.000 Wilson Sporting Goods 



380 
750 
300 



100 

200 

1.S00 

1,200 



Summary of Existing Parking Statistics 



Existing Stations in Wisconsin Central Market Area 



21 



Total Parking Capacity 
Total Parking Use 
Percent Use 



12,192 

10,792 

89% 



Stas with Rates Above Metra's Design Capacity (85%)^ 
Stations with Rates Above 90% 

Average Ridership at ail 21 Stations 
Average Ridership at Stations Above 85% 
Average Ridership at Stations Below 85% 



13 
8 

1,056 

1.361 

650 



•Metra's 85% design criteria for sizing parking facilities is intended to allow for variations 
in demand. Seasonal peak commuter demand is usually found during winter months. 
and can fluctuate day-by-day depending on weather. 



2564 



Parking at Existing Metra Stations near Wisconsin Central Corridor 



•: 1 


Station 


Fare 
Zone 


Mile 1 
Post 1 


1991 
Boardings 


Parking 


|Llne 1 


Capacity 


Use 


% Use 


1 i 
iMilw- North ' 


Morton Grove | 


C 


14.3 


672 


335 


335' 


100.0% 1 


Milw- North ; 


Golf 


D 


16.2 


267 


44 


19 1 


43.2% ' 


1 
Milw -North 


Glenview 


D 


17.4 


1.450 


755 


750 i 


1 
99.3% ' 


Milw -North 


Northbrook | 


E 


21.1 


1.4S8 


677 


638! 


94.2% ! 


1 Milw -North 


Oeertield 


E 


24.2 


1,669 


768 


685! 


1 
89.2% ' 


i 

' Milw -North 


Lake Forest 


F 


28.0 


522 


462 


406 1 


87.9%' 


Milw -North 


Ubertyville 


H 


35.5 


1.139 


759 


1 

720 1 


94.9% 1 


Milw -North 


Grayslake 


1 


41.0 


369 


150 


1 
147 i 


98.0% i 


Milw- North 


Round Lake 


1 


44.0 


371 


239 


200 


83.7% 


Milw -North 


Long Lake 


J 


46.0 


93 


62 


56 


90.3% 


Milw -North 


Ingleside 


J 


47.8 


48 


30 


15 


50.0% 


Milw -North 


FoK Lake 


J 


49.5 


433 


393 


303 


1 
77.1%| 


C&NW-NW 


Park Ridge 


C 


13.5 


818 


498 


351 


1 
70.5% i 


C&NW-NW 


Oee Road 


C 


15.0 


403 


133 


107 


1 
80.5%! 


C&NW-NW 


Des Plaines 


D 


17.1 


1.146 


452 


359 


•1 
79.4% l! 


C&NW-NW 


Cumt>erland 


D 


18.6 


537 


316 


233 


■1 
73.7% II 


C&NW-NW 


Mount Prospect 





20.0 


2.073 


896 


847 


94.5% 


C&NW-NW 


Arlington Heights 


E 


22.8 


3,129 


1.388 


1.201 


86.5% 


C&NW-NW 


Arlington Park 


E 


24.4 


1,829 


1,557 


1,225 


78.7% 


C&NW-NW 


Palatine 


F 


26.8 


2,010 


1,372 


1,291 


94.1% 


C&NW-NW 


Barrington 


Q 


31.9 


1,748 


906 


904 


99.8% 




Total 


22.184 


12.192 


10.792 


88.5% 



2565 



Comparative Park- n- Ride Station Access Travel Time 
from Sample Locations in Wise Cntrl Corridor 



! 


Existing Service | 


Wise Cntrl Service i 


Total Time 


Map 
Key 


Station Line 


Travel 
Time 


Station 


Travel 
Time 


Difference 

(mins) % 


A 


Fox Lake Milw-N 


12 


Lake Villa 


4 


-8 -63.3% 1 


B 


Fox Lake Milw-N 


16 


Antioch 


1 


-15 -93.8%' 

'1 


C 


Zion C&NW-N 


20 


Antioch 


7 


•1 
-13 -65.0%:! 

1 


D 


Grayslake Milw-N 


18 


Lake Villa 


2 


1 

-15 -86.5%; 


E 


Grayslake Milw-N 


13 


Rnd Lake Beach 


7 


-6 -46.4% ii 


F 


Grayslake Milw-N 


8 


Junction 


4 


II 

-5 -57.1%li 

!| 


G 


Ubertyvilte Milw-N 


12 


Mundelein 


2 


II 

-11 -87.5% II 
ii 


H 


Palatine C&NW-NW 


27 


Vernon Hills 


14 


-13 -46.7% I! 
II 


1 
J 


Deeriield Milw-N 


21 


Uncolnshira 


3 


-17 -83.3% 1 

1 


Arilngton Hghts C&NW-NW 


22 


Buffalo Grove 


9 


-13 -60.9% 1 
-15 -90.0% |l 


K 


Arlington Hghts C&tW-NW 


17 


Wheeling 


2 


L 


Des Plaines C&NW-NW 


14 


Prospect Hghts 


4 


-11 -75.0%!| 



Notes: 

— Times arc for one-way journeys. 

— All trips arc assumed to drivc-and-park at nearest station. 

Park— n— Ride distance was scaled from maps, assuming a logical arterial routing. 

— Park-n-Ride travel time was based on assumed auto speeds ttiat were generally highest at 
northern end of corridor and lowest at southern end. 



2566 



Comparative Travel Times 
For Sample Locations 



^ WISCONSIN 


Proposed Station Locations: 


1 
2 
3 
4 
5 


O'Hare Airport 
Deval (Des Plalnes) 
Prospect Heights 
Wheeling 
Buffalo Grove 


6 


Lincolnshire 


7 


Vernon Hills 


8 


Mundelein 


9 
10 


Grayslake/Llbcrtyvllle 
Round Lake Beach 


11 


Lake Villa 


12 


Aniloch 



MM 







2567 

INDEX OF WISCONSIN CENTRAL LETTERS OF SUPPORT 

March 9. 1993 Letter - State Representative Andrea Moore 

March 9, 1993 Letter - State Senator Adeline Geo-Karis 

March 5, 1993 Letter - Mayor of Libcrtyville, Jo Ann Eckmann 

March 5, 1993 Memo - State Senator William Peterson 

March 2, 1993 Letter & Resolution - Mayor of Round Lake Beach, Carl Schrimpf 

March 1, 1993 Letter - Mayor of Lincobshire, Barbara LaPiana 

February 9, 1993 Letter & Resolution - Qty Qerk of Des Plaines Donna McAllister 

December 1992 Resolution - Lake County Municipal League 

December 1, 1992 Letter - Village Planner of Buffalo Grove, Robert Pfeil 

August 13, 1992 Letter - Mayor of Lake Villa, Joyce Prayer 

y^ril 25, 1992 Resolution - Village of Round Lake Beach 

November 9, 1990 Letter - Mayor of Buffalo Grove, Vema Clayton 

October 29, 1990 Letter - Lake County Board Member, C. Richard Anderson 

July 20, 1990 Resolution - Prospect Heights 

July 9, 1990 Resolution - Lincolnshire 

June 26, 1990 Resolution - Libertyville 

June 13, 1990 Resolution - Northwest Municipal Conference 

June 4, 1990 Resolution • Buffalo Grove 

May 7, 1990 Resolution - Wheeling 

April 10, 1990 Resolution - Vernon Hills 

June 29, 1988 Letter - North Suburban Mass Transit District 

April 16, 1987 Press Release - North Suburban Mass Transit District 

(CLERK'S NOTE. --The letters of support and resolutions 
do not appear in the hearing but are available for review in 
the subcommittee files . ] 



2568 




2569 

CLARK COUNTY, NV 

REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 

STATEMENT OF LEE G. GIBSON, PLANNING COORDINATOR 

Mr. Chairman, Senator D'Amato, members of the subcommittee, I am Lee Gibson, 
Planning Coordinator for the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) of Clark 
County, Nevada. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony 
regarding the RTC's bus maintenance and storage facilities project. I also formally 
request that the testimony I have provided be entered into the record. 

The RTC of Clark County, Nevada is a public agency created under the laws of the State 
of Nevada. The RTC serves as the metropolitan planning organization, county gas tax 
agency and the public transit authority for the Las Vegas urbanized area. 

I would like to begin by noting that the Las Vegas metropolitan area has experienced 
phenomenal growth for the last 12 years. Between 1980 and 1992, population has 
increased by over one-third. During 1989, it was estimated that over 6,000 persons 
moved to Las Vegas each month. By 1993, the rate had "slowed" to 3,500 persons per 
month. Forecasts prepared for the region indicate that by the year 2000, well over 1.0 
million persons will reside in the Las Vegas Valley. 

As the "entertainment capital of the world," Las Vegas welcomed over 20 million visitors 
in 1992. With over 86,000 rooms available, Las Vegas is a world class destination resort 
that affords a wide variety of recreational opportunities and unparalleled convention and 
meeting facilities. On any given day, the actual population of Las Vegas, defined as 
residents and tourists, exceeds 1.5 million persons. 

The dramatic growth in population, housing and employment has resulted in a 
tremendous increase in traffic congestion and a significant deterioration in regional air 
quality. In 1990, as Las Vegas looked towards its future, transportation problems were 
identified as the major threat to the quality of life for southern Nevadans and to the 
enjoyment of Las Vegas by visitors from across the United States and many foreign 
nations. 

To address these issues, the voters of Clark County overwhelmingly approved Question 
10, a local referendum that identified new funding sources that generate $110 million a 



2570 



year dedicated to transportation improvements. The RTC is responsible for administering 
much of this program and now invests over $75 million annually towards regional street 
and highway projects. 

Of the $110 million, over $25 million has been dedicated towards implementing a new 
and expanded mass transit system. On December 5, 1992, the RTC acting in its capacity 
as the public transit authority, initiated the new Citizens Area Transit (CAT) service on 
21 routes using 128 buses and providing service from 6:00 A.M. to 1:30 A.M. for 
residential areas and 24 hour service on the world renowned Las Vegas "Strip". This 
level of service is a five fold increase over the previous level of mass transit service and 
is the largest single start-up of bus service during the last 20 years in the United States. 

Since December, 1992, the first four months of CAT operation, over 4.0 million 
passengers have used the service. With a ridership that significantly increases every 
month, the farebox recovery rate for the system has steadily increased and currently 
stands at 38.0 percent. Las Vegans have embraced the new CAT service with an 
enthusiasm unseen for transit in most western cities. 

To start the new CAT service, over $20.0 million in local funds were used to acquire 90 
new buses, develop an interim maintenance facility, purchase computer equipment for 
dispatching purposes, acquire shop equipment, and install fuel storage capabilities, and 
buy support vehicles. To date, no Section 9 or Section 3 Federal Transit Administration 
(FT A) funds have been used for start-up activities. 

As the RTC continues to move forward with developing the CAT system, it is imperative 
that proper attention be focused on bus maintenance and storage facility needs. The 
RTC's bus maintenance and storage facility project represents a concerted development 
effort to construct three integrated facilities: a heavy maintenance facility, a satellite 
storage facility and a paratransit facility. As documented in RTC's Short Range Transit 
Plan, the current interim maintenance facility is clearly inadequate. Estimates show the 
CAT fleet requires a site of approximately 25 acres and maintenance building of 120,(XX) 
square feet. The interim facility is located on a site that is only 14.5 acres and the 
maintenance building is only 16,(XX) square feet. With such a deficiency, the RTC must 
take action now to ensure that adequate maintenance facilities are available to protect 
community's new investment in the rolling stock and properly maintain its useful life. 



2571 



The problem of inadequate maintenance facilities also extends to the RTC's paratransit 
services. With the start-up of ADA paratransit services scheduled for the fall of 1993, 
it has been projected that an additional 10 acres will be needed to adequately maintain, 
store, fuel and clean a fleet of 146 service vehicles. The current facility only has the 
capacity to store and maintain 21 vehicles. With orders already placed for 29 new 
paratransit vehicles, the RTC is faced with once again having to use an inadequate 
facility during the short term. 

To accommodate travel needs in the Las Vegas Valley, the CAT route structure must 
follow the grid street pattern. However, in a grid operation, the least cost location for 
a bus maintenance and storage facility is at the center of the urban area which is 
characterized by high land prices, small land parcels, and restrictive local regulations 
that prohibit the development of bus maintenance and storage facilities. Under such 
constraints, the best alternative is to construct a satellite storage facility. 

For RTC's project, the satellite storage facility will cover fifteen acres and be used to 
store, fuel, conduct preventive maintenance and dispatch vehicles into revenue service. 
Over the usual 40 year facility life, the capital invested into a satellite facility is more 
than recovered from the operating efficiencies that accrue from keeping deadhead miles 
to a minimum. 

Three phases of work are presently underway for the integrated facilities project and 
include: 

1) Feasibility Analysis- The feasibility analysis work will entail refining the 
RTC's maintenance program requirements, cost estimates, and schedule 
for implementation. A key element of the feasibility analysis will be the 
identification of alternative sites for a heavy maintenance facility, a 
satellite storage and fueling facility, and a paratransit maintenance and 
storage facility. 

2) Conceptual Design- The conceptual design phase involves the 
preliminary layout of each facility on the alternative sites. Attention will 
be focused on ensuring adequate and safe internal circulation, proper 
placement of buildings, appropriate buffers, and landscaping as required 
by local land use regulations and design standards. 

3) Environmental Assessment- Concurrent with the above efforts, the RTC 
will complete an environmental assessment in accordance with the 
National Environmental Policy Act and FTA procedures. Every effort 
will be made to ensure that the implementation of the program will not 
have adverse and irreversible consequences on the environment. 



2572 



With the completion of the work now underway, the RTC intends to apply for funding 
through the FTA Section 3 program. Based upon discussions with the FTA Regional 
Office, local engineering firms, and the RTC's experience in developing the current 
interim facility, the total cost for the project is currently estimated at $37.6 million for 
the three integrated facilities. 

Given the current schedule for the above work, the RTC is requesting $8.8 million in 
Federal funds for Fiscal Year 1994 for land acquisition, final design engineering, and 
value engineering for the project. The RTC is prepared to obligate the requested Section 
3 funding during Fiscal Year 1994. An additional $17.5 million in Section 3 funding for 
construction and furnishings is expected to be requested in Fiscal Year 1995. The RTC 
will commit to "overmatch" the project by 30 percent of the total cost. Accordingly, in 
Fiscal Year 1994, the RTC will dedicate $3.8 million and in Fiscal Year 1995 dedicate 
$7.5 million of local funds for the project. 

In conclusion, the RTC's new transit system has been received with extraordinary 
support throughout the Las Vegas Valley. CAT is perceived as a major new milestone 
in improving the quality of life, increasing employment opportunities, improving regional 
air quality, and providing a viable option to the single occupant vehicle. The 
Commission believes strongly that the CAT system is an integral service that will attain 
national objectives for a balanced intermodal transportation system, lower usage of single 
occupant vehicles, attainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards, and the 
mobility standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 

The bus maintenance and storage facility project will help ensure Las Vegas' achieving 
these national objectives, ensure a quality service for the residents and visitors to the Las 
Vegas Valley while protecting the value of local and federal investments. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for allowing me to submit this testimony on the RTC's 

integrated facilities project. If you or any member of the committee require any 

additional information, please contact me at: 

Regional Transportation Commission of Clark County, Nevada 
301 East Clark Avenue, Suite 300 
Las Vegas, NV 89101 
Telephone: (702) 455-4481 



2573 

DALLAS, TX 

DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY 

STATEMENT OF KATHY INGLE, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF 

DIRECTORS 

INTRODUCTION 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee. It is indeed my pleasure to present 
this written testimony to the Subcommittee on behalf of the citizens of our service area 
and the Board of Directors. 

FUNDING REQUEST 

I am pleased to present our FY 1994 Section 3 discretionary funding request for $86 
million, $77.5 million of which will be dedicated to the South Oak Cliff Light Rail Transit 
(SOC LRT) portion of the Starter System and $8.5 million to be the third and final year 
of funding for the South Oak Cliff Bus Maintenance Facility and Training Academy. 
Page 1 of the attached Project Briefing and FY 1994 Earmark Requests for Light Rail 
Transit and Bus Projects contains details on previous appropriations. 

DART has obligated all of the $82.5 million previously appropriated to the SOC LRT 
project, and we will obligate every dollar of today's requested amount for the project 
before the close of FY 1994. The $77.5 million represents the remaining funds 
necessary to bring the appropriations equal to the $160 million authorized by the 
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991. 

DART is providing extra leverage for the Federal funds received. DART has reversed 
the traditional Federal/Local share by providing 80% ($681 million) of the LRT Starter 
System cost of $841 million from local sources, namely our one-percent sales tax 
dedicated to transit. The $160 million in Federal funds represent the remaining 20% 
share. Not only does the dedicated sales tax give us the financial capacity to construct 
this LRT, but it provides the financial capability to operate and maintain the LRT 
system, as well as our bus and van services. 

Last year at this time, DART had just awarded the first SOC LRT construction contract 
and we were projecting the award of a number of future contracts. I can tell you today 
that we have fulfilled the promise of substantial construction progress during FY 1992 
and the first half of FY 1993. In fact, over the past 12 months, DART has committed 
$558 million, or 66% of the total project cost, to contracts for the LRT Starter System, 
including: 

• Construction contracts awarded for each of the five line sections and the 
Service and Inspection Facility, 

• Acquisition of 82 of 263 real estate parcels for stations, parking and line 
sections, 

• Acquisition of 18.1 miles of the Santa Fe Railroad, 

• 40 LRT Vehicles under contract and on order, and 



• 



All LRT electrification, signal, communication and track material procurements 
have been awarded. 



2574 



Furthermore. DART has kept to the published schedule and has remained within the 
$841 million budget for the Starter System. For more information, please refer to the 
"Committed to Date" chart and the "Summary Schedule" in the attached Project Briefing 
and FY 1994 Earmark Requests for Light Rail Transit and Bus Projects . 

For those Members that have not had an opportunity to visit Dallas, I invite you to come 
and tour our multi-modal transit system. We operate 864 buses, as well as 138 vans 
for paratransit, demand responsive and fixed route services. Our current FY 1993 
operating budget is $136.2 million, all funded with passenger fares and sales tax 
receipts. DART does not utilize any Federal operating assistance. 

We are also a transit authority with significant bus capital needs. Though a majority of 
our identified capital needs, amounting to $63 million in FY 1993, are funded with FTA 
Section 9 funds and our 1% sales tax, we have identified one critical capital project 
which will require funding beyond the normal sources. DART is seeking $8.5 million for 
the third and final year of funding for the South Oak Cliff Bus Maintenance Facility and 
Training Academy. This project will permit DART to maintain our future fleet of 
alternatively fueled buses, helping to meet Federal energy and environmental goals. In 
addition, we will enhance our ability to effectively train our employees. For additional 
information please refer to page 4 of the attached Project Briefing and FY 1994 
Earmark Reguests for Light Rail Transit and Bus Projects . 

ACCOMPLISHMENTS 

I would like to briefly highlight DARTs major accomplishments since we appeared 
before this Subcommittee last year. 

South Oak Cliff Light Rail Transit Project (Federally Funded) 

Through a very cooperative partnership with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), 
DART has moved swiftly into construction. DART'S staff, working with both the FTA 
Administrator's office here in Washington and the FTA Regional office in Fort Worth, 
has: 



• 



Obtained an $160 million Letter of No Prejudice permitting the commencement 
and continuation of construction. 



• Commenced construction in February of the Pacific/Bryan Transitway Mall in 
the Dallas Central Business District, 

• Completed more than half of the Trinity River Bridge construction that started 
a year ago, 

• Completed relocation of high-voltage transmission towers on the SOC-1 line 
segment, 

• Procured LRT vehicles, and electric traction, signal and communication 
systems, and, 

• Commenced construction of the Service and Inspection Facility. 

All of the $82.5 million previously earmarked has already been obligated through the 
previously mentioned contracts. In fact, the Federal share of the $558 million of 
commitments to date amounts to $91.5 million. By the close of FY 1993, we estimate 
this amount to exceed $120 million with the award of two construction contracts and the 
continued acquisition of real estate. DART is funding, with local sources, the $37.5 
million difference between our commitments and prior appropriated funds. 



2575 



Based on our implementation schedule for construction of the final line segments in the 
SOC LRT project (OC-1, SOC-1 and SOC-2). DART will obligate the entire FY 1994 
Earmark request of $77.5 million prior to the close of FY 1994. 

North Central and West Oak Cliff Light Rail Transit Project (Locally Funded) 

These two line segments represent extensions to the SOC LRT and are being 
constructed with receipts from the DART 1 % sales taxes. With this dedicated funding 
source, over the past year DART: 

• Began construction of an $86.8 million, 3.5 mile twin-bore tunnel under North 
Central Expressway on February 29, 1992, and has bored more than a mile of 
the southbound tunnel, 

• Began construction on the West Oak Cliff line section in August 1992, with the 
second segment to be under construction in early FY 1 994, and, 

• Will commence construction, in the spring pf 1994, of the NC-2 senmonf 
between Mockingbird and Park Lane. 

Disadvantaged/Minority/Women Business Enterprise Goals and Commitments 

DART has made very significant progress in fulfilling a commitment to maximize the 
opportunities for Disadvantaged/Minority/Women Business Enterprises (D/M/WBE) to 
compete for LRT design and construction contracts. In 14 out of 15 cases to dale, the 
goals established by DART have been met or exceeded by the perspective contractors. 
This is graphically depicted by the figure entitled "D/MA/VBE Goals and Commitments 
to Date" in the attached Project Briefing and FY 1994 Earmark Requests for Light Rail 
Transit and Bus Projects . 

DARTs overall procurement program has shown significant increases in the contract 
amount awarded to M/WBE. In FY 1990. $10.2 million in contracts/subcontracts were 
awarded to M/WBE, increasing to $19 million in FY 1991 and $54.4 million in FY 1992. 
Through March 9, 1993, DART has awarded $132.95 million in contracts, $31 million of 
that amount to M/WBE. 

South Oak Cliff Bus Maintenance Facility and Training Academy 

In anticipation of the remaining funds for the South Oak Cliff Bus Maintenance Facility 
and Training Academy, DART has made positive steps toward implementation of this 
vital project. The DART Board of Directors recently approved the site for the facility 
and has authorized the hiring of a design consultant. DART will award a construction 
contract in FY 1994 utilizing the total of $24 million in Section 3 Bus funds. This project 
will provide an economic stimulus to South Oak Cliff both during construction and when 
it becomes operational. 

High Occupancy Vehicle Lane Projects 

DART'S highly successful HOV project on 1-30, using the innovative moveable barrier 
system, has resulted in mobility benefits to both the HOV lane users and 
single-occupant users on the main lanes. The project affords the 16,000 daily HOV 
lane users a predictable travel time consistently shorter than can be accomplished on 
the main lanes. HOV users generally are saving 8 minutes during the morning peak 
hour and 3 minutes in the evening over travel times on the main lanes prior to 
implementation of the HOV lane. The $14.6 million cost of this project was shared by 
TxDOT and DART. Section 9 formula funds in the amount of $2.7 million were used to 
supplement $2.9 million of DART local funds. 



2576 



HOV lane projects evaluated for inclusion in the FY 1993 Transportation Improvement 
Program of the North Central Texas Council of Governments, the MPO for the region, 
ranked at the top of the list of eligible projects. $67.4 million in Congestion 
Mitigation/Air Quality (CMAQ) and matching TxDOT funds were allocated to 10 HOV 
lane construction projects. The Board of Directors recently increased DART.'! 
commitment to HOV lane funding from 10 to 16.7 percent of the total project costs, 
thereby matching the TxDOT share. 

DART and the Texas Department of Transportation received an Award of Merit from the 
U. S. Department of Transportation for the 1-30 HOV project. The award, for excellence 
in highway design, recognizes projects because they "strongly advocate excellence in 
planning, design, and development of safe, functional and environmentally sensitive 
projects". 

Dallas Central Business District Bus Transfer Facilities 

DART has applied for a FTA grant for the two Dallas CBD Bus Transfer Facilities that 
were part of the FY 1993 transportation appropriations. This project is vital for our 
DART patrons, the City of Dallas and the downtown business community. We are 
currently in the real estate appraisal process. Upon grant approval, we will immediately 
commence design of these facilities. 

Commuter Rail Project 

We are actively advancing our project to provide commuter rail service between Dallas 
and Irving, with a future extension to Fort Worth. Progress has recently been made 
between RAILTRAN, the managers of this rail corridor, and the operating railroads and 
should result in signed agreements by April 30, 1993. An interlocal agreement 
between DART, the Ft. Worth Transportation Authority and RAILTRAN, under 
simultaneous negotiation, should be ready for Board approval by June 1. Commuter 
rail operation can begin within 22 months of the execution of these agreements. Due to 
progress being made in the railroad negotiations, DART procurement efforts for the 
vehicles, previously on hold, have been reinitiated. 

North Central Corridor Alternatives Analysis/Draft Environmental 
Impact Statement 

DART has received approval from FTA to initiate a second Alternatives Analysis/Draft 
Environmental Impact Statement. DART will analyze alternatives in the North Central 
Corridor from Park Lane, the terminus of the LRT Starter System, northward to the City 
of Piano. This extension is the planned next phase of the eventual 66-mile LRT 
system. 

DART has completed the Scoping Process. The Board recently approved a list of 
alternatives for further evaluation. The Board is scheduled to approve a Locally 
Preferred Alternative by the end of 1993. We will then initiate the Final Environmental 
Impact Statement process. 

DART Paratransit Services 

DART'S Paratransit services include HandiRides for our physically challenged patrons 
as well as DARTAbout demand responsive van service. The FY 1993 Paratransit 
budget is $12.5 million with a projected ridership of 875,000. To accommodate demand 
for service, DART is expanding the fleet of alternatively fueled vans to 198 by the end 
of FY 1993. Service has been improved with the recent activation of the 900 MHz radio 
and automatic vehicle locator systems, the upgrade of the automated scheduling 



2577 



system and the consolidation of the dispatch function in the DART Communication 
Center. 

The FY 1992 DART ADA Plan was one of the first plans in the country to be approved. 
We have recently submitted our required FY 1993 update to FTA. 

CONCLUSION 

The cooperative efforts of DART, the City of Dallas, our suburban member cities and 
the Federal government continue to improve public transit and mobility in this region. 
This Subcommittee's decisions over the past three years to participate in these 
projects created positive momentum for DART. I urge your endorsement of DARTs FY 
1994 funding requests in order to sustain this momentum we have collectively gained. 
DART is building the key mobility components now to underpin the transportation and 
economic future of the region. 



DART Earmark Requests for Inclusion 
in FY 1994 Transportation Appropriations Bill 



Appropriation Recommendations 
(in Millions) 



Prior FY94 Request 

SOC Light Rail Transit Project 

(Fourth Year of Funding) . $82.5 $77.5 



SOC Bus Maintenance Facility 
and Training Academy 
(Final Year of Funding) $15.5 $8.5 



Light Rail Transit Starter System: 
South and West Oak Cliff, and North Central Corridors, 
and Dallas Central Business District 



Light Rail Transit Starter Systenn is 20 miles (with 21 stations) of the overall 
66-mile DART Light Roil Transit System (See mop). 

The LRT Starter System will open in 1996. 

Capitol cost of the Starter System is $841 million in escalated dollars. 



2578 



66% of the LRT Starter System tias been committed by contract as of 
February 23, 1993. 

FY 1994 Earmaric request for Soutti Oal< Cliff LRT is $77.5 million. 

Contractual Commitments (In millions) for Design and Construction of ttie 
LRT Starter System: 

Design & Construction $309 

Vetiicles and Systems 167 
Rigtit-of-Way 47 

Ottier (Management, Insurance, Testing, 

Track Materials) 35 

Total ' $558 

Refer to "Committed To Date" cfiart on tfie next page. 

Construction Contracts to be Awarded by September 1993 

SOC-1 and OC-1 

Construction Contracts to be Awarded during FY 1994 

SOC-2A. SOC-2B, NC-2 AND WOC-2 



2579 



Q 

O 
H 

H 



O 

u 

< 
o 
o 



s 




e O 



s 



-a 
o 



93eiU33J3J 



2580 




2581 




2582 



CBD/Soufh Oak Cliff Line: 

- 54% of construction and land costs supported by RA Section 3 funds 

- From Ledbetter Drive (Loop 12) ttirougti Dallas CBD 

- $160 million authorized by ISTEA 

- Surface ligtit rail transit 

-Utilizes formerrailroadright-of-way,.electric utility corridors, and street 
rights-of-way 

- Transit mall along Pacific and Bryan Streets is under construction 

- LRT bridge across Trinity River is under construction 

North Central Line: 

- Locally funded with 100% DART sales lax receipts 

- From Dallas CBD to Park Lane 

- At surface in former railroad right-of-way from Park Lane to 

Mockingbird Lane 

- Tunnel under North Central Expressway from Mockingbird Lane to CBD 

- Boring of the twin tunnels is underway 

West Oalc Cliff Line: 

- Locally funded with 100% DART sales lax receipts 

- From Westmoreland Road to junction with South Oak Cliff Line 

- Surface running in former railroad right-of-way 

- West Oak Cliff - 1 section is under construction 

Sysfemwide Procurements: 

- Service & Inspection Facility is under construction 

- 40 LRT Vehicles under contract and on order 

- Traction Electrification contract awarded 

- Communication contract awarded 

- Signal contract awarded 

- Track material contracts all awarded 

The following chart highlights the D/M/WBE Goals and Commitments To Date 
for the LRT Starter System Design and Construction contracts. 

Refer to Summary Schedule and Six Month Look Ahead on following pages. 



2583 



H 
< 
Q 

O 

H 

H 
Z 



o 

< 
O 

PQ 




!§ 



^1 



e 



S 



a 



g. 
I 






2584 




2585 




2586 
DART Bus Project 

South Oak Cliff Bus Maintenance Facility and Training Academy 

- $30 million Bus Maintenance Facility 

- Replaces leased facility and consolidates operations 

- Accomnnodates 250 buses 

- Includes provision for fueling and nnaintaining the growing DART 

Natural Gas fleet of buses and vans 

- Training Academy to serve botti bus and rail training needs 

- Site selection complete 

- Initiating procurement of firm to design ttiis facility 

- FY 1994 Earmark request is $8.5 million, whichi represents the final 

allocation of $24 million committed in FY 1992 



2587 



DALLAS-FORT WORTH RAILTRAN 

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM N. GARRISON, CHAIRMAN. POLICY 

COMMITTEE 

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to submit testimony in support of the RAILTRAN 
commuter rail project and the Intermodal Transportation Center. Before the House Committee 
I was joined by Congressmen Martin Frost and Pete Geren and Congresswoman Eddie Bernice 
Johnson. Their interest indicates the strong level of local support for the RAILTRAN project. 

In 1984, RAILTRAN was created as a joint administrative agency of Fort Worth and Dallas to 
oversee the day to day management of a rail corridor between the two cities. RAILTRAN is 
guided by a six member policy committee, three members appointed each by the Dallas and Fort 
Worth City Councils. The Committee is responsible for making policy, management and 
operations recommendations to the two City Councils regarding the 34 miles of RAILTRAN 
right-of-way. 

The groundwork for this project was laid in the early 1980's when the Cities of Dallas and Fort 
Worth, with the assistance of the Federal Transit Administration and the State of Texas, 
purchased 34 miles of railroad right-of-way linking the central business districts of the two 
cities. Even though there were no immediate plans for the corridor, those involved sensed its 
potential as a future commuter rail line. They also knew the immediate importance of the 
preservation of freight service for those businesses located along the line. At present, Union 
Pacific Railroad and the Burlington Northern Railroad use the line as a link in their national 
service and serve local customers along the line. 

In 1989, the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) began planning the use of the RAILTRAN 
corridor for commuter rail service. In 1990, the Fort Worth Transportation Authority joined 
DART and began planning to extend service to downtown Fort Worth. Projections for year 
2000 indicate Dallas County is expected to be the sixth fastest growing county in the United 
States in terms of jobs, and Tarrant County will rank 17th. The population of the metroplex in 
1990 was 3,918,095 and the projected population for the year 2000 is over 4 and 1/2 million. 

Along with population and job growth, increased airport traffic and operations will have a major 
impact on vehicular traffic in the area. Estimated aircraft takeoffs and landing for the year 2000 
are projected to be 36,569,000. The proposed expansion of Dallas/Fort Worth International 
Airport is expected to attract new business and create jobs in the area. 

This increase in employment will lead to increased traffic congestion and pollution on existing 
highways and streets in the area. The purpose of the RAILTRAN commuter rail project is to 
provide a viable and complementary means of transportation for commuters in the congested 
Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex. Year 2000 traffic projections indicated that a significant 
percentage of the region's freeway system will be severely congested. In addition, studies 
conducted by the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) have also shown that 
the present and proposed roadways in the area will become congested even after they are 
expanded to the maximum number of lanes possible under their current right-of-way. 

Commuter rail service along the existing RAILTRAN corridor, which parallels State Highway 
183. will contribute significantly to increased area mobility by the year 2010. It will facilitate 
the conservation of energy, contribute to air quality improvements, reduce traffic congestion, 
reduce travel times, and encourage more economic activity in the area. 

Since the purchase of the RAILTRAN corridor a great deal of work has been done in 
preparation for commuter rail service. Survey work and aerial photography have helped give 
a better picture of what was purchased from the Rock Island Line. An analysis of the 
thirty-four at-grade crossings along the line has been completed, catalogued, and procedures 
begun for clearing those most necessary. 



2588 



An environmental assessment has already been completed and reviewed by the FTA on Phase 
I service with a finding of No SigniHcant Impact. The environmental assessment for Phase 11 
of the service has also been completed and is currently being reviewed by the FTA. In addition, 
the site selected for a maintenaiKe facility has received a Categorical Exclusion by the FTA. 

In 1991, an Implementation Study for RAILTRAN commuter service was funded by the Federal 
Transit Administration (FTA) and administered by North Central Texas Council of Governments 
(NCTOG), the metropolitan planning organization. This study develoj)ed a service plan for the 
proposed project from Dallas' central business district to Fort Worth's central business district. 
It proposes implementing the RAILTRAN commuter service in phases. Phase I includes 
morning and afternoon peak period service between Dallas Union Station and Downtown Irving 
every twenty-five minutes. Phase II adds service to downtown Fort Worth at 50 minute 
intervals, with four intermediate stops serving the mid-cities. Later service phases include 
access to D/FW International Airport, the nation's second busiest airport. Once it is fully 
operational, the service will be completely bidirectional with on-and-off peak service every 25 
minutes from end to end. 

Stations will be well lit, safe, easy to use, and conveniently located along major street and 
highway intersections. The stations will be located so that the greatest concentration of 
residential and business traffic is served. Also, plans for most of the stations call for modest, 
economical facilities consisting of platforms, parking lots, and commuter drop-off areas. Some 
stations will provide local bus or light rail connections, and all stations will be fiilly accessible 
to disabled passengers. 

Union Station is the starting point in downtown Dallas. This station will be served by light-rail 
and buses. This means that passengers from any part of DART's service will have easy access 
to the RAILTRAN commuter service and all points westward to Fort Worth and to the airport 
as well. 

To the west, RAILTRAN will service the cities of Irving, Grand Prairie, Arlington, Hurst, 
Richland Hills, and Haltom City on the way to Fort Worth. Once the system enters downtown 
Fort Worth, it will service both the north/central and the southern parts of downtown. The 
southern service center will be located in the historic Texas and Pacific (T&P) railway building. 
This building, along with the adjacent U.S. Post Office Complex will be renovated. The 
planned restoration of these two historic buildings in conjunction with the relocation of Interstate 
30. which presently cuts both buildings off from downtown, will create an entirely new focus 
in that area and should facilitate a rebirth of inner-city development and renewal. The Texas 
and Pacific Building will become a true Intermodal Transportation Center housing commuter 
rail, city buses, inter-state trains and buses, local taxis, an excursion railroad, ticket desks for 
airlines, and possibly high-speed rail. 

The Railtran commuter rail service and the T&P Intermodal Center together will open up whole 
new opportunities for both those who drive and the transit dependent. It will lessen the 
dependence on the automobile, thereby helping to improve air quality and traffic congestion. 
In addition, the region will benefit from capital expenditures to build commuter rail stations and 
make line improvements. These investments will translate into real estate development and 
heightened cormnercial activity in downtown Dallas, downtown Fort Worth and the cities along 
the line. RAILTRAN does all this in a cost-effective manner, by using an already existing 
freight line and upgrading it for commuter purposes. It further strengthens the Dallas-Fort 
Worth Metroplex-one of the fastest growing areas in the nation. 

The federal government's commitment to this project has been demonstrated by both the original 
purchase grant and also authorization in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act 
of 1991 (ISTEA). ISTEA authorized a total of $19.1 million for the RAILTRAN project. 

This authorization was split between the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the 
Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Section 1 108, die Priority Intermodal Projects authorized 



2589 



$13.4 million to the Fort Worth Intermodal Transportation Project to be constructed at the 
historic Texas and Pacific Building in downtown Fort Worth under the auspices of the Federal 
Highway Administration. 

Preliminary engineeruig will begin soon for Phase II. Phase I service is scheduled to begin in 
late 1994. After a review of the project language of ISTEA, it has been determined there are 
no statutory ceilings for FY 1994 and other out years. In order to keep the project moving 
RAILTRAN requests $27 million of federal funds in FY 1994. 



Thank you for your consideration of this request. 



2590 

DE^^VER, CO 
23RD STREET VIADUCT REPLACEMENT PROJECT 
STATEMENT OF WELLINGTON E. WEBB, MAYOR 

In the 20 months since I became Mayor of Denver, I have focused a great deal of my 
time on one major surface transportation project, and I am here again today to ask for your help 
with it I have had the support of the State of Colorado and the metropolitan planning 
organization (Denver Regional Council of Governments) every step of the way. They have 
committed every resource they could find, and it still isn't enough to complete the $56 million 
23rd Street Viaduct replacement project We still need $25 million. 

The 23rd Street viaduct is 102 years old. It has a sufficiency rating of 4 on a scale of 
100. It must be replaced. It is the top priority project on the Colorado Department of 
Transportation's bridge list TheCity of Denver committed $10.4 million upfront That paid 
for design, right-of-way acquisition, and environmental work. 

Phase I of the project is underway. The 23rd Street project received $13 million in 
programmed federal funds and, with $4.3 million in Denver funding. Phase 1 was advertised 
and awarded in 1992. This will be two lanes and will include construction of as much of the 
new facility as can be constructed while the current facility remains in operation. This includes 
a minimum two-lane roadway structure. 

This committee recommended the 23rd Street viaduct project in Denver for priority 
listing in the report accompanying the FY1991 and FY1992 Transportation Appropriations 
Acts. That recommendation did not lead to FHWA discretionary bridge funding for the viaduct 
during those funding years. 

We thought we had resolved a significant portion of this funding problem last fall when 
we received a copy of page 36 of the conference report to accompany H.R. 5518, the FY 1993 
Transportation Appropriations bill It said (in part): 

Discretionary bridge allocations. ~ The Conference agreement includes the following 
allocations of discretionary bridge funds: 

23rd Street Viaduct, Colorado $12,000,000 

Eight other bridges were listed after 23rd Street The list of bridges funded by FHWA 
in late October of 1992 looked very different from the conference report list Colorado did not 
receive any funding from this pot for 23rd Street Viaduct 

We waited until the President had signed the bill into law on October 6, 1992, artd then we 
went ahead with prq)aration of the bid package for Phase IIA of the 23rd Street project We 
made decisions based on a minimum buildout of four lanes by Spring 1995 - when the new 
Coors Field baseball stadium will open. It may seem as though we could have changed those 
decisions when the funding we were counting on did not conK through, but one corollary is 
ineversible. 

On October 17, we closed and began to dismantle the 20th Street viaduct our only 
alternative route into downtown from I-2S at the north end of the Central Business District 



2591 



The closing of 20th Street has been planned for years; it is the final section of the FTA/FHWA 
North 1-25 Busway/HOV project This committee appropriated funds over several years for 
this project It is under construction. 

The Regional Transportation District expects to have buses using the new 20th Street 
facility by Fall 1994. The roadway portion of the viaduct will be open the following year. It 
will provide two lanes for regular automobile traffic into downtown, plus the bus/HOV lane. 

The neighborhoods just west of 1-25 have been adamant players in the planning for 
access to Downtown. They have insisted that 23rd Street not 20th Street must be the primary 
access point in order to keep air pollution levels and traffic congestion down in this oldest 
residential section of Denver. The Qty and Colorado Department of Transportation have 
agreed that the 20th Street interchange will not open until the 23rd Street viaduct replacement is 
completed and opened. This agreement was made in order to mitigate the traffic impacts in 
adjacent neighborhoods, and it means access to Downtown will be severely limited if 23rd 
Street is further delayed. 

After the disappointment last fall, Denver got additional help from tfie Denver Regional 
Council of Governments and Colorado [department of Transportation as they allocated FY 1993 
program funds to the project But even that could not stretch far enough to finish the project 

I thought we had part of the problem solved again this spring when the House passed 
the President's economic stimulus package. Colorado estimated that $40 million would come 
to our state for ready-to-go transportation projects - and there has never been such a ready one 
as 23rd Street The amount planned for 23rd Street if that package had passed was $1 1.6 
million. 

Now that the bill known as H.R. 1553 has passed without any transp<Htation funding 
in it I am here again to ask for your help. We still need $25 million in discretionary bridge 
funds for this project We are ruiuiing short on time to complete the project without causing 
major delays in traffic entering Downtown Denver from 1-25 on the nordi. 

The rest of the project is designed and awaiting funding. The funding request for the 
remaining work is $25 million in federal funds, with the Qty of Denver funding the last $6.3 
million. This will include removal of the existing structure and construction of the remaining 
project not in Phase I. This includes $1.1 million over and above the original estiinate, which 
Denver will pay. We ask for your assistance. 



2592 

COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 
STATEMENT OF DWIGHT BOWER, DEPUTY DIRECTOR 

SUMMARY OF REQUEST: 

The Colorado Department of Transportation offers testimony 
that substantiates the need for priority designation for 
Fiscal Year 1994 I-4R discretionary funding of the I 70/1 25 
interchange complex project. The Intermodal Surface 
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 {Public Law 102-240, 
Section 1020) included discretionary set-aside funding 
provisions for projects over $10 million on an urban area 
high volume route. 

The I 70/1 25 interchange complex is located in the City and 
County of Denver, whose population has grown 200% since the 
interchange was first constructed in 1951, The interchange 
is severely congested and the most heavily traveled 
interchange in Colorado, a situation aggravated by the high 
percentage of trucks utilizing the facility. The interchange 
was originally designed in the 1940's, constructed in the 
1950's, and saw its last major reconstruction project over 25 
years ago. Much of the interchange was designed before the 
interstate design standards were mandated, the project is 
estimated to cost $200 million and is over 50% complete. Once 
improved, the interchange complex will meet interstate design 
standards. 



NAME AND TITLE OF WITNESS: 



Mr. Dwiqht M. Bower 

Deputy Director 

Colorado Department of Transportation 



ACTION REQUESTED 

The Colorado Department of Transportation requests that 
Congress identify the reconstruction of the I 70/1 25 
interchange complex for priority designation in the 
allocation of Fiscal Year 1994 discretionary I-4R funds, 



I am Dwight Bower, Deputy Director of the (Colorado Dq)artinent of 
Transportation. I would like to thank Chairman Lautenberg and the members of 
this subcommittee for this opportunity to speak. 

The population of the Denver area has grown 200% since the original 
construction of the interchange at the intersection of Interstate 70 and Into'State 
25 was built in 1951. The interchange complex, known locally as the 
"Mousetrap", is now severely congested during much of the day, a situation 



2593 



aggravated by the high percentage of trucks utHizing the facility. More than a 
quarter of a million vehicles travel through the interchange complex on the 
average day. By the year 2010, travel is projected to grow to 325,000 vehicles 
per day. 

The State of Colorado and the Colorado Department of Transportation are 
moving forward to make this congested crossroad of Colorado operate more 
safely and efficiently. Hopefully, once improved it will be known as the 
"Better Mousetrap." 

It will be "Better" because of your foresight for including 
the Interstate 4R discretionary funding provisions in the 
Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act 
of 1987 and the Intertnodal Surface Transportation Efficiency 
Act of 1991. We are very appreciative that you acted to meet 
the needs of busy urban areas like Denver with this valuable 
funding mechanism. 

Colorado ha^s been very fortunate to have received $104 
million of federal 1-4R discretionary funds the past five 
years. This year, we received $15 million, which will 
complete over half of the Better Mousetrap project. We have 
aggressively utilized al2 of the 1-4R discretionary funds 
received in the timely manner. The portions of the project 
that have been completed and opened to traffic at the 
interchange have been deemed major accomplishments toward the 
successful completion of the project. We need your continued 
support to complete this major interchange project. 

The project meets all the criteria established in the Act for 
1-4R discretionary funding. The estimated construction cost 



2594 



of the project is approximately $200 million, which includes 
the state matching share. 

The reconstruction of this major interchange complex has 
national significance. The Mousetrap is the only interstate 
to interstate interchange complex in Colorado with roadways 
that traverse Colorado and adjacent states. I 25 is also the 
major north-south route for transportation of hazardous 
waste. 

The reconstruction of this interchange complex will also 
reduce the potential for accidents and provide a much safer 
facility to the traveling public. The overall operations and 
efficiency of the interchange complex will be greatly 
improved with the reconstruction. 

The construction of a Bus/High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) 
corridor down the center of 1 25 is integral to the timely 
reconstruction of the I 70/1 25 interchange complex. The 
Bus/HOV project is a multi-agency effort of the Federal 
Transit Administration, Federal Highway Administration, 
Colorado Department of Transportation, Regional 
Transportation District and the City and County of Denver. 

Colorado Is requesting your support to secure priority 
designation for our Fiscal Year 1994 application of $40 
million in 1-4R discretionary funds. Completing the 
Mousetrap project continues to be a high priority for the 
Colorado Department of Transportation. We are prepared to 
utilize $40 million in Fiscal Year 1994 toward the 
reconstruction of the Better Mousetrap project. 



2595 

We are steadfast in our commUment to tins project, and we 
are eager to continue the work that is completed or under 
construction. We ask for your continued support and request 
your endorsement of priority designation for FY 1994 1-4R 
discretionary funding. 

THE REBUILDING OF THE I 70/1 25 INTERCHANGE COMPLEX 
• (THE BETTER MOUSETRAP PROJECT) 

;.;--^ .-. AND. ; •;.■ ■ 

, COLORADO'S FY 199.4 REQUEST FOR 

INTERSTATE 4R DISCRETIONARY FUNDING 

WHY A Bh'lTEk MDUSETRAP? 

The I 70/1 25 interchange cxritiplex serves the metrcpolitan area of 
Etenver, whose population has grcwn 200% since the interchange was 
first constructed in 1951. Ihe interchange corplex, known locally as 
the Mousetrap, is severely congested during much of the day. This 
situation is aggravated by the hi(^ percentage of trucks utilizing 
the facility. More than a quarter of a million vehicles use the 
Mousetrap on the average day. By the year 2010, travel is projected 
to grow to 325,000 v^iicles per day. Ihe Mousetrap is the most 
heavily used interchange ccnplex in the State. 

Vte at the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) are continuing 
to move forward to make this crossroads of Colorado operate more 
safely and efficiently. Hopefully, once iirproved it will be known as 
the Better Mousetrap. 



2596 



It will be Better because of your foresii^t in inclixiing the 
Interstate 4R discretionary funding provisions in the Surface 
Tran^xjrtation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 [ (the 
Act) (Public Law 100-17, Section 114)] and the Interinodal Surface 
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (Public Law 102-240, Section 
1020) . We are very ajpreciative that you acted to meet the needs of 
busy urban areas liJce Denver with this valuable funding mechanism. 

Colorado hcis been very fortunate to have received $104 million of 
federal I-4R discretionaury funds the pcist five years to reconstruct 
the Mousetrap. In FY 1993, CDOT received $15 million of federal I-4R 
discretionary funds. CDOT has cotpleted or has under construction 
over fifty percent of the Better Mousetrap project. 

THE NEED 

The Better Mousetrap project meets the criteria established in the 
Act for I-4R discretionary funding. Priority consideration is to be 
given to projects whose cost exceeds $10 million eind is on a high 
volume route in an urban corea. The estimated construction cost of 
the Better Mousetrap project is approximately $200 million. This 
amoxont is in total dollars and includes both federal and state 
matching dollars. 

The reconstruction of this major interchange ccmplex has national 
significance. The Mousetrap is the only interstate to interstate 
interchange ccstplex in Colorado with roadways that traverse the 
entire state. Althou^ transporting hazardous waste is restricted on 



2597 



portions of I 70 thru Denver, I 25 is the major north-south route for 
transportation of hazardous waste. 

Reducing the potential for accidents (such as the hi^ily publicized 
August 1, 1984, torpedo incident) is a primary goal of this project. 
Mary ranps function far belcw the current design standard of 40 miles 
per hour. The existing facilities achieved their capacity many years 
ago and cperate at an extremely poor level of service during peak 
periods. During the average year, more than 175 accidents occur at 
the Mousetrap, accounting for em annual econonic loss of $7.1 
million. Regarding the torpedo incident, six 30-foot-long Mark 48 
torpedos v*dch were being hauled frcm the State of Washington to a 
sutjtarine base in Groton, Connecticut, spilled onto I 70 v^en the 
driver failed to negotiate a 25 irf*i raitp. Not knowing the hazard 
potenticil of the torpedos, neeirby residents were evacuated and both 
interstates were closed for ei^t hours. 

Ihe reconstruction of the Mousetrap interchange complex is integral 
to the completion of a Bus/Hi^ Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) corridor in 
the middle of I 25. The North I 25 Bus/HOV project is a multi- 
agency effort of the Federal Transit Authority (FTA) , Federal Hi<^way 
Administration (FHWA) , CDOT, Regional Transportation District (RTD) 
and the City and County of Denver. The Bus/HOV project will cost 
nearly $200 million to complete, and is scheduled for conpletion in 
late 1994. 

A REQUEST 

Colorado is requesting your svj^jport to secure priority designation 
for our FY 1994 application of $40 million in I-4R discretionary 



2598 



funds. Conpleting the Mousetrap project continues to be a hi<^ 
priority for the Colorado D^jarbnent of Tran^jortation. We are 
prepared to utilize $40 millicsi of I-4R discretiOTiary funds in 
FY 1994 toward the reccMTstnK:rtJ.on of the Better Mousetrs^ project. 

We are steadfast in our ccannitroent to this project, and we are eager 
to COTitinue the work that is coitpleted or under construct icai. We ask 
for your continued support and request ycur endorseanttent of priority 
designation for FY 1994 I-4R discretionary funding. 



[CLERK'S NOTE. --The color maps accompanying this 
report could not be printed in the hearing but are 
available for review in the subcommittee files.] 



2599 

DOWLING COLLEGE, OAKDALE, NY 
STATEMENT OF DR. VICTOR MESKILL, PRESIDENT 

I want to thank the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member for the opportunity 
to submit the following testimony on behalf of Dowling College's continuing effort in 
establishing The National Aviation and Transportation (NAT) Center. 

Since its founding in 1955 as Suffolk County, New York's first four year 
college, Dowling College has been successful because it has been more than an 
educational institution. From the beginning, the College established itself as part of 
the community. The Board of Trustees, administration, faculty and students 
recognized that education involved not only classroom activity and study but also 
work, play, and participation in their community. They committed themselves to 
providing educational programs with a strong liberal arts foundation in order to 
develop each student's ability to think critically and to integrate all of life's 
experiences. 

The plan for Dowling College in the twenty-first century maximizes the 
strengths of present individuals, organizations, and governance mechanisms; and 
utilizes the concept of building upon existing strengths and furthering our uniqueness. 
Dowling College has continually progressed and, in fact, has developed a unique 
distinction and prominence in higher education, particularly in the area of aviation and 
transportation sciences. 

During the last ten years, Dowling College has been through the most dynamic 
growth period in its history. The Dowling College curriculum has been continually 
refined, strengthened, and expanded, but always in keeping with College's educational 
philosophy. Developing new curricula and programs to meet the ever-changing human 
resource needs of our society is an exciting challenge. 

Dowling's presence has made it possible for thousands to attain their personal 
and career goals. For the past twenty-five years, it has been a policy of Dowling 
College to emphasize aviation educational opportunities. New frontiers and challenges 
are now before us. With the same vision, boldness and drive, we are establishing The 
National Aviation and Transportation (NAT) Center, a multi-disciplinary, intermodal 
transportation, educational campus at Brookhaven Calabro Airport on Long Island, 
New York. 

The NAT Center will provide leadership for producing generations of 
transportation specialists. These specialists will support pace-setting research in a 
host of fields and monitor the future of the nation with regard to aviation and 
intermodal transportation studies, and the education of critically needed professionals. 
The NAT Center will serve the culturally diverse 55 million population of the Northeast 
corridor and throughout the nation. 

The federal government's partnership that was initiated two years ago remains 
vital to the College's undertaking of this major project. By the year 2005, The NAT 
Center will provide facilities for 3,000 students and will have created over 1 600 jobs. 

Dowling College is undertaking Phase I of a national campaign to raise funding 
from a number of sources for the establishment of The NAT Center. The investment 
of federal, state, local and private funds will enable Dowling College, using Long 
Island, with its diverse land, sea, rail and air needs, to create an intermodal laboratory 
for the entire Nation. As a pioneer and innovator in intermodal transportation 
education. The NAT Center is planned to be an educational model to advance the 
National Transportation Policy. 



2600 



With the continued assistance of the federal government, Dowling College, with 
the funds provided to date, has embarked on an exciting plan to create the 
environment and space necessary for The NAT Center to function as a national model 
and pioneer in transportation research and education. The NAT Center will enhance 
and expand the School of Aviation and Transportation programs by providing state-of- 
the-art instructional facilities -- all in an effort to provide a flagship center for the 
nation focused on intermodal transportation. Dowling's aviation/transportation 
enrollment will grow from Its current level of 350 to 3,000 culturally diverse students 
(2,200 residential:800 commuter). 



BUILDING FOR THE FUTURE 
The National Aviation and Transportation Center 

At completion of the year 2005, The NAT Center will include the following 
academic and research activity centers: 

LEARNING RESOURCES CENTER COLLECTION OF EXCELLENCE: 

The Learning Center will provide an unequaled repository of transportation 
information and research, including FAA and NASA Teacher Education 
Resource Centers to be used by industry, students, and the public. Librarians 
will help students and faculty identify and locate pertinent information and can 
conduct bibliographic searches using state-of-the-art electronic information 
management databases. As a distance learning facility, utilizing satellite 
transmission and fiber optic super highways, the intellectual capital of The NAT 
Center will be shared with community colleges, magnet high schools, military 
installations, and colleges and universities with whom we have established 
articulation programs. 

COOPERATIVE EDUCATION AND INTERNSHIP (CONTEXTUAL LEARNING) 
CENTER: 

Among the priority foci of the enter is the identification of the separated 
military whose experience in the military is applicable to new careers in 
transportation. Those individuals identified in the military will be given degree 
credit toward their Bachelors and/or Masters degree(s). This priority extends 
to displaced workers, particularly those from the lagging defense industry, as 
well. The Center has already begun a retraining program for displaced 
engineers. These professionals, through expanded internship and cooperative 
programs with industry throughout the Northeast corridor, can begin job 
placements while attending The NAT Center. 

CONFERENCE AND CONTINUING EDUCATION CENTER: 

The Conference Center will provide a nationwide opportunity to exchange 
views and information on transportation issues for government, industry, and 
educational leaders. It will also provide a center for the intermodal 
transportation professionals to enhance and upgrade their skills as well as for 
the re-training of displaced workers. 

Furthermore, it is estimated that the average person will change careers at least 
six times. Since most people can only prepare for a new career after work. The 
NAT Center will offer expanded opportunities for career change and 
advancement through the application of distance learning techniques. 



2601 



RESEARCH INCUBATOR INSTITUTE: 

An institute for advancing promising new transportation technologies, solutions 
and expertise with direct application to the needs of government and industry 
is a major focus of The NAT Center. The Institute will improve and enhance 
intermodal functioning through its partnership of real world associations. To 
ensure the widest possible impact, we will share our findings through networks 
to a broad audience working to collaborate with local, state and national 
groups. 

CULTURAL AND LANGUAGE CENTER: 

Without question, the United States must position itself more competitively in 
the global marketplace now and in the future. The global nature of 
transportation and the delivery of products and services on time, safely and 
cost effectively, requires a comprehensive understanding of how business is 
conducted throughout the world. Understanding the language and the culture 
of a country or a region becomes essential. The NAT Center's Cultural and 
Language Center is committed to prepare transportation students to be able to 
successfully interface with their professional counterparts in distant countries. 

Furthermore, in order for our country's businesses to become more successful 
in conducting their business abroad, the Cultural and Language Center is 
planning to initiate a number of accelerated programs of a short duration that 
will prepare executives for the country or region they are planning to approach. 
An understanding of business practices, politics, culture and language will 
provide the executive with the confidence they need to be effective. 

SIMULATION CENTER: 

The Simulation Center is a major component designed to provide risk-free 
training using state-of-the-art computer technology. The Center will provide 
theoretical analysis, research evidence, and prototypes that can initiate the 
restructuring of intermodal educational goals and methods. It will focus on 
simulation models for all modes of transportation. The Simulation Center will 
additionally focus on and serve children in grades K-12 and teachers by featuring 
a Challenger Learning Center. This Center will provide a hands-on learning 
experience by using interactive simulators in a mission control setting. 

To share with you the extent of our programs and curricular planning, 
components of the Simulation Center are outlined below: 

A. The Challenoer Center 

Based on the reputation of Dowling College's aeronautics and education 
programs, we have received designation as a Challenger Learning Center 
from the Challenger Center for Space Science Education. Specifically 
geared for the K-12 student, the Center creates a stimulating environment 
for both students and teachers to learn and discover more about science, 
math and technology. 

B. Traffic Control Laboratory 

Dowling has plans for an expansive use of computer simulators to 
include all modes of transportation. This includes, for example, an 
integration and linkage of air traffic control and flight simulation with on- 
line weather information from a student in the Meteorology lab. Thus, 
from an educational perspective, plans include the focus on the 



2602 



functional and cognitive fidelity of a simulation environnnent that brings 
to the student the best possible real-time simulation experience. 

C. Transportation Safety Laboratory 

The Transportation Safety Laboratory is designed for long term 
continuing research in specific areas of related technology. Among the 
areas of research included are: the failure of aircraft, vehicles, and 
facilities; planning and design of craft and facilities; airport capacity 
enhancement techniques; human performance in the transportation 
environment; improving safety and security; and other issues pertinent 
to developing and maintaining a safe and efficient transportation system. 

The controlled environment of the laboratory permits students to 
conduct experiments under the watchful eye of trained scientists. Using 
a systems approach, students are able to analyze theories, techniques 
and methodologies to enhance the safe and efficient movement of 
people and cargo in an intermodal environment. The use of modeling is 
employed to solve practical problems involving the optimal use of limited 
resources in varied configurations. 

D. Structures and General Purpose Laboratory 

Research on the structure of matter and the properties of materials has 
provided the key foundations for new industries which in turn have 
changed the nature of society. Basic scientific research and the 
associated development of talent are two agents of progress. The 
Structures and General Purpose laboratory is a facility wherein students 
will gain advanced knowledge in physics, chemistry, biotechnology to 
spawn innovations in environmental science and technology. 
Experiments and simulations to solve intermodal transportation problems 
will be employed extensively as will distance learning so that the 
Center's expertise can be shared. Present planning includes the 
development of a new wind tunnel to apply principles of aerodynamics 
to air, ground, and maritime vehicles. Lighter fabrication materials will 
be evaluated for their application to the various modalities. Experiments 
will be conducted to support anticipated intermodal transportation 
academic programs. 

E. Meteorology Laboratory 

The use of technology in forecasting the weather enables students to 
augment their formal course work with practical application using real 
weather data. A thorough understanding of weather phenomena is 
essential for operators and managers of all the modes of transportation. 

Advanced technology makes it possible for modern microcomputers to 
provide on-line information on weather patterns to dramatically improve 
understanding of natural phenomena such as tornados, hurricanes, and 
other severe weather patterns. Since weather radar is one of the most 
widely used weather systems in aviation and transportation, the 
familiarity with the technology and how it assists safety in "go/no-go" 
situations is critical. A priority consideration will be the development of 
improved dissemination of weather information to transportation users. 



2603 



Human Factors Laboratory 

The laboratory is to provide students with theoretical education and 
practical experience to identify possible solutions which directly relate to 
the personnel subsystem called the human factor. This Involves 
leadership and crew coordination techniques, situational awareness, and 
the ability to use all available resources. Focus is on the vehicle 
dynamics, human factors, biomechanics, public policy, accident data 
analysis, injury prevention and program evaluation. 

Specific areas offer curricula enrichment and/or development of the 
human factor involvement with various requirements for automation, 
system safety, maintenance, human performance, work station design, 
selection and training of personnel, communications and intermodal 
transportation facility design. 



A CURRICULUM FOR THE FUTURE 

The NAT Center offers, through Dowling's School of Aviation and 
Transportation, the first undergraduate degree program in intermodal transportation 
in the Nation; undergraduate and post graduate degrees in every form of 
transportation... rail, highways, sea and space. Simply stated, our ability to educate 
students translates into providing a critically needed supply of trained personnel to fill 
jobs on which the lives of millions depend. 

During the coming decade, transportation and development of our Nation's human 
resources are clearly among the most important issues this Nation will address. Based 
on our strength of more than 25 years of experience in aeronautical education, 
intermodalism is being integrated into the curriculum. Curriculum development will 
continue with new courses and majors being added at appropriate times in The NAT 
Center's overall development. At completion. The NAT Center will have an enrollment 
capacity on site of 3,000 which will provide increased access for Bachelor and 
Masters degree candidates to continue their education. 

Through program concentrations and core curricula offered at this multi- 
disciplinary, intermodal facility, we educate highly trained specialists to plan and 
operate today's transportation systems and those of the future. 

The College's cooperation with the College of Aeronautics at LaGuardia is being 
enhanced through increased course offerings on their campus and at The NAT Center. 
Through distance learning, a number of courses will be offered off-site to a 
geographically dispersed student population from community colleges and high 
schools that articulate with Dowling's School of Aviation and Transportation. 

At The National Aviation and Transportation Center, faculty would design effective 
solutions for a myriad of transportation business needs; expand research and 
development partnerships with business bringing new products to market more 
rapidly; provide for technical advancement by implementing specialized continuing 
education programs for those already in the field; expand Masters degree programs; 
and improve the transportation industry's quality management approach. Changes in 
technology, operating procedures and federal regulations place a burden upon the 
transportation specialist already in the field and continuing education programs have 
been naturally evolving from the College's successful aviation program to formally 
address this need. Workshops and courses offered to the aviation specialist will be 
expanded to include all the modes of transportation. Retraining opportunities will be 
created for the unemployed who, based upon their educational attainment, could 



2604 



matriculate towards a new degree or attend short courses to gain skills which would 
lead to employment. 



ECONOMIC STIMULUS TO THE LONG ISLAND ECONOMY 

Importantly, as an economic driver. The NAT Center's development and 
operation will add $26.2 million annually to the regional economy while creating 458 
full-time jobs. This activity will augment federal, state, and local tax collections by 
approximately $7.5 million. Located in and surrounded by several community 
development designated distressed areas, The NAT Center's development and job 
retraining capacity will have a qualitative and quantitative impact on Long Island's 
economy creating new jobs and infusing millions of dollars into the lagging economy. 

Not surprisingly, Governor Cuomo's initiatives for bolstering the Long Island 
economy placed an emphasis on job creation and transportation infrastructure 
improvement. His economic growth agenda included: high speed ferry service from 
Shoreham, development of Calverton into an air cargo center, roadway improvement 
of all major east-west arteries, rail link improvements and strategies to enhance 
economic development through improved global competition, technology transfer and 
defense diversification. The New York State and the federal government initiatives 
are strongly related to Dowling College's NAT Center and its ability to provide skilled 
employees to plan and operate these systems and to improve current models for 
greater efficiency. 



CONCLUSION 

As a nationally recognized "center of excellence". The NAT Center will educate 
the skilled employees to create a seamless transportation network which will keep 
New York State competitive in a global economy. In the past two years. The National 
Aviation and Transportation Center has received $ 7.5 million in federal funding 
through the Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee out 
of a total $15 million federal funding package for construction of its first phase. By 
the 1994-95 academic year, the academic facilities will be utilized by approximately 
800 students. 

Dowling College will begin construction in 1 993 of the Aviation Learning Center 
and intends to continue construction to complete Phase I of The NAT Center 
development by 1996. 

AVIATION LEARNING CENTER: 

Building on the strength of its six FAA recognized degree programs, the first 
facility to be constructed will be a state-of-the-art 63,683 square foot flight and 
light maintenance learning center with a hangar, classrooms, fixed base 
operations, flight and air traffic control simulators, and flight dispatchers 
operations office. The Aviation Learning Center will provide the facility to begin 
to relocate many of the academic activities now well underway at the Oakdale 
campus. Changes in technology, operating procedures and federal regulations 
place a burden upon the transportation specialist already in the field. The NAT 
Center's continuing education programs have been naturally evolving from the 
College's successful aviation program. With new facilities to accommodate 
growth, NAT Center workshops and courses offered to the transportation 
specialist are being expanded to include all the modes of transportation. 
Retraining opportunities created for hundreds of unemployed workers and 
recently separated military who, based upon their educational attainment, could 



2605 



matriculate towards a new degree or attend short courses to gain skills which 
could lead to ennployment will now be offered at The NAT Center. Additionally, 
the new facility will affect The NAT Center's Research Incubator. Within this 
new environment, our faculty will continue to design effective solutions for a 
myriad of transportation business needs and work to expand research and 
development partnerships with business bringing new products to market more 
rapidly and providing solutions to logistical and transportation problems. Their 
current research includes: transportation modeling simulation, total quality 
management, transportation systems analysis, and simulataneous tandem 
simulation training. 

Groundbreaking for the Aviation Learning Center will be early this summer, with 
the completion date of August I, 1994. 



At completion by 2005, The NAT Center would include seven educational 
facilities, as well as residence halls. 

Dowling College is a well managed institution. In the past thirteen years, we 
have been able to generate operating surpluses that have made possible our 
investments in plant improvements and endowment for scholarship. Dowling is now 
well-positioned to take on this major capital project and insure its success. 

For two years prior to the commencement of the first phase of The National 
Aviation and Transportation Center, an intensive strategic planning process was 
undertaken by the faculty, administration, and trustees of the College. A major 
outcome of this planning process was building internal and external consensus of The 
NAT Center's priorities which have become the goals of this capital program. 
Currently, the College is in the $18,000,000 Phase I of this all-inclusive development 
program. 

Today, the nation's business enterprises must move people, goods, and 
integrated services in the fastest, most efficient manner in order for the United States 
to remain competitive in the global economy. Delays and inefficiencies cost our 
economy billions of dollars a year in lost productivity undermining the nationfs ability 
to compete globally. The essential ingredient to meeting the nation's needs in the 
next century is personnel who understand technology and have adequate preparation 
to enter tomorrow's work force and remain current with changing industry 
requirements. 

In order to insure the depth of learning required by a twenty-first century work 
force, Dowling College established the National Aviation and Transportation (NAT) 
Center. The multi-disciplinary intermodal transportation curricula offered at The NAT 
Center are built on the strong foundation of a quarter of a century of exemplary 
aviation/transportation programming. Thus, Dowling College is developing its National 
Aviation and Transportation Center to prepare for the national need for intermodal 
transportation specialists who can fill the human resource needs of air, ground, rail, 
space and maritime industries. 

It has only been through the Senate Subcommittee on Transportation and Related 
Agencies' shared vision and untiring efforts that we were successful in receiving $7.5 
million in appropriations for The NAT Center. We thank you for your support of this 
project which will meet the human resource needs of the nation's transportation 
industry while at the same time provide societal, environmental, and economic 
benefits. 



2606 



Through the Congressional investment, the facilities to house The NAT Center 
have begun to be constructed on a 105 acre site acquired at the Brookhaven Calabro 
Airport. When the first building opens in the 1994-95 academic year, a minimum of 
800 students will be able to realize the benefit of your support {not to mention the 
458 jobs created). The Congressional support, coupled with intense College efforts, 
have accelerated the opening and the College has successfully leveraged the federal 
investment with local, institutional, government and private contributions to 
accomplish the following: 

Land Purchase from the Town of Brookhaven 

Land Use and f\/laster Plans 

Engineering and Environmental Studies 

Curricula Development 

Architectural and Engineering Plans 

Site Plan Review and Permits 

Site Clearance 

Initial Staffing and Human Resource Development 

Yet much remains to be done in order to complete this phase of the 
construction. The decisions made with the initial appropriations have set the direction 
for the future of The NAT Center. Dowling College now seeks $7.5 million of 
continuation funding to sustain The NAT Center's construction through this phase. 
The continuation of the federal government's partnership is vital to make this project 
fruitful. To stop now would not be prudent, since without federal monies the 
construction of partially built buildings would come to a halt. I appreciate your 
interest in this important initiative and the opportunity to submit this testimony on its 
behalf. 



2607 

EMBRY-RIDDLE AERONAUTICAL UNIVERSITY 

STATEMENT OF STEVEN M. SLIWA. PRESIDENT 

i 

Executive Summary 

! 

This aviation and aerospace industry in the U.S. is at a critical juncture. Bold new 
initletives are needed to regain and retain U.S. leadership in the global market place. New 
paradigms in education offer a "competitively" neutral method to promote free flow of 
information and build national capabilities in this critical high-technology arena. 

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University is a fully accredited University with special 
emphasis on academic disciplines related to the aviation/aerospace industry. The University 

is asking for funding assistance to establish the first ever aviation doctoral program and on- 

I 
line aviation/aerospace library. The program will emphasize applied probfem solving and 

i 
critical thinking in a cooperative venture between academia, government and industry. 

Delivery will make unique use of state-of-the-art communication and computer resources for 

"on-site" education and Information retrieval. Innovations, entrepreneurial excellence, 

managerial efficiency and increased productivity will be the long term results of successful 

collaboration in this new paradigm. 

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University appreciates this opportunity to participate in this 

j 
important forum. Challenge* facing the aviation community are formidable; solutions will 

I 
require vision and unprecedented govemment-industry-academic teamwork. Under your 

j 
Congressional leadership, coojperative teamwork can meet these challenges with Embry-Riddle 

as a contributing partner. 

First, for the record, let me briefly introduce Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. We 

4profit, fully accredited University offering aviation/aerospace 

master's level. We serve some 18,000 students from alt 50 

states and over 80 foreign countries, pursuing aviation careers at two residential campuses, 

one in Daytona Beach, Florid^, and one in Prescott, Arizona, and at over 1 00 Resident Centers 

located throughout the United States and Europe. Our mission is to provide a comprehensive 

education of such excellence that graduates will be responsible citizens and well prepared for 

productive careers in aviatioo and aerospace. We have an estimated 250 million dollar tuition- 

i 

generated economic impact In our operating communities. 



are an independent, not-for 
related degrees through the 



2608 



We are currently Involved in a 35 million dollar program to upgrade our Engineering and 
i 
Technology LaboraTories, to network our campuses and resident centers and to exploit the 

potential o< high technology, distance learning strategies. We appreciate the Committee's 

support of this initiative in tfie form of 1 1 .5 minion dollars in FY 1 993 eppropriatlon and wish 

i 
to assure you that the invaptment you made will be used wisely in support of the future of 

aviation aerospace in the United States. 

i 

Embrv-Rlddie'B Proposal 
The U.S. aviation and aerospace Industry is at a critical Juncture in its development. 
There is a need to develop a consolidated Intellectual and informational resource Infrastructure 
to continue the technological gains made In this vttai sector of the economy. Our proposal 
addresses both of these issues. In the intellectual area, we are proposing e uniquely 
structured and delivered doctoral level degree program to develop and systemize the 
interdisciplinary body of knowledge essooiated with aerospace/aviation technology. We intend 
to focus on developing critical thinking and leadership within the university — an approach 
strongly supported by Robert Reich, Secretary of Labor and Lester Thurow, Dean of the Sloan 
School of Managamant at MIT, and others. In the Infrastructure area, we are proposing the 
development of an on-line information system providing user friendly instant access to the 
entire spectrum of aerospace aviation Information. We see these proposals as synergistic 
pieces of an overall approach that will provide a "paradigm shift" at the highest level of 
intellectual achievement. We are suggesting an academic, industrial and government 'partner- 
ship" to tackle an immediate and pressing problem. Our research advisory board, comprised 
of senior industry and government officials, has enthusiastically endorsed the injtlatives that 
I bring before you today. 

Background to the Probigm 
By way of background, 1 would lika to quote some recent studies on the extent of the 
problem. The FAA R&D Review Panel, under the Chairmanship of Norm Augustine, provided 
a perspective on this problem. in their 1993 update on U.S. leadership in Air Traffic Services. 
Their report said. 



2609 



1. "In 1991, the U.S. evtstion industry experienced a favorable 
balar>ce of trade of $29 billion that, together with other aero* 
space activities, comprised the single largest positive contribu- 
tion to the trad^ balance." 

2. *ln spite of the past accomplishments of U.S. aviation, this, the 
final decade of aviation's first century, finds most U.S. airlines 
in dire finandal circumstances; segments of general aviation 
manufacturing iggnerally driven abroad, commercial aircraft 
manufacturers herd pressed by foreign government-supported 
producers;..." j 

3. 'The United States today stands in serious risk of losing world 
leadership in aviation and eufforing the toss in competitiveness, 
jobs end convenience that that portends.* 

Estimates vary as to tt^e extent of the problem ranging anywhere from 6 to 1 billion 
dollars in finar>cial losses, and. up to 340 thousand lost jobs - but there is no doubt that there 
is a problem arxJ that it Is serious. International competition and the decline in defense 
spending have cut heavily intp this once flagship American industry. It Is also no secret that 
much of the foreign competitron has been heavny subsidized by foreign governments ~ some 
estimates put the figure as high as 26 billion dollars. 

The future will bring more problems. New technology must conform to environmental 
and other regulatory restrictions that were not present in the past - this new climate will 

make cooperation and Inforrriation sharing a necessity for successful product development. 

i 

Tt\B country that develops the most flexible institutional arrangements will be the leader in this 

area. 

Although there are existing and new problems, thd long term outlook for aviation and 
I 
aerospace is spectacularly bright. No other industry h^s the potential for technologicel 

breakthroughs and product irhprovement that aviation and aerospace have shown. The post 

cold war global economy willionly grow mora Interdependent, and aviation is the only feasible 

mode of transportation in our time critical world. Beyond this space travel and space 

i 

technology will be the new frontiers. We cannot afford to lose our competitive leadership in 

i 

this critical international groWth area. 

The question is whether we as a nation are capable of leadirig thte way with the 
irrtegration that is warranted. Our intellectual capital for the job comes from many different 
areas: engineering, computer science, marketing, logistics, and so on. But not one of them 
comes from aviation. No one has the Integrated preparation to wrestle with tlie Issues, 
possibilities, and challenges inherent in the development of new technologies for aviation. If 



2610 



new developments are approached from one side of tt^e problem without an understending 
of the effects on other parts, we stand to lose rather than make gains in the global marl^et. 

Our Suggested Aooroach 

We must be careful in the way we approach this problem, and we should put our 
emphasis in the areas that wPI give the greatest return. Foreign governmerns have opted to 
support specific product development at a cost of billions of doHsrs. We may choose to do 
something similar, but we also should investigate less costly more long term solutions to 
regaining and retaining our preeminence in the aviation/aerospace area. One approach that 
has proved cost effective ar>d pontlcaily feasible Is Investment In education. Developing our 
human capital is a strategy that does not subsidize individual competitors, but does build our 
national capabilities in this critical arena. 

Aviation/aerospace education now needs direction, recognition and supporti As ■ 
relatively new discipline, it has borrowed from more established discipliries such as 
aeronautical, electrical, and niechanical engineering, computer soienoe, and other technical 
and managerial disciplines. The time has come to establish aviation technology as separate, 
pioneerirtg high-technology field; this field needs direct high vistbiitty government support like 
that provided to engineering In the post Sputnik era. Much of this support can be provided 
in a relatively low cost loan environment - the payback over the productive lifetime of 

students will be substantial! At present, although there are ov/er 300 undergraduate and 
graduate programs in aviatlorr^ there is no doctoral level degree offered In the field. This 

critical omission can be traced to the newness of the discipline, the reluctance of academic 

I 
institutior^ to sponsor new (Competing) departments, the multi-disciplinary nature of the 

subject, end the cost of inaugurating new programs. There is also no effort to bring together, 

i 
in a systemic way, the enormous Information resources available for this industry. 

I 

The U.S. aviation systism has been band-aided beyond recognition and repair - the 
i 
environment for which legislation/regulation was developed was to address an anti-monopoly 

natior>al Intra-system. We now face an international system of competition. We rx) longer 

live in a world where U.S. Technology, economic productivity and capital investment can set 

the rules for international economic development. 



2611 



There is no stnQle. quick-fix. single solution; however, 8 work force educated to critical 

thinking with leaders who understand aviation, aviation technology and the economic, 

! 
political, environmental and ^dological world in which it operates •* is an esaentisl dement. 

i 
Educational Preofam Concept 



We envision a uniaua educational endeavor that is solution oriented, application 

i 
focused, and dedicated to cooperation between academia, industry and government. The 

I 
degree we are proposir>g wRI not emphasize pure research. Rather, we would require an 

I 
internship with industry. Thesis requirements would be of a practical problem solving r>ature. 

Emphasis would be placed ori integrated solutions to project management. Relationships and 

i 
cooperathra approaches to problem solving would be goals of such a program. Our approach 

will supplement entrepreneMrial and creative activity In the work place itself. 

i 
Embry-Riddle has giv^ much attention to developing the philosophy, goals, curriculum, 
i 
and approach. Ir^iut has be^n provided by government, industry, and academic Institutions. 

The curriculum is designed to integrate practice and critical thinking. The curriculum and 

methodological approach are contained in internal working documents that are available on 

request. 

There is elready a modal for this type of degree In Academla - and It Is the practitioner 

type of degree In medicine and law. We want to exterK) this cofKept Into the high technology 

Industrial work place and reap the benefit of cooperation with e somewhat different approach 

- one that emphasizes bridge building and a flow of information which is more 'real time." 

end more availeble for siiorter term solutions. The participants in tNs system wilt be 

networked in their educational and their professional activities. Academia can take a leading 

role In developing and implementirtg new concepts and Meas. Computer Science and 

Management Information System are excellent samples of the synergistic effects of academia, 

industry and government. These disciplines were almost unknown twenty years ago, and 

I 

now they have grown into the leading technological Innovators workJwide. The principle ia 
the same in aviation - offering unique education programs and state-of-the-art technological 
access to information as a direct low cost approach to significant productivity gains. 

An innovative deOvery approach is essential to make sure the program reaches the 
widest possible audience with the least disruption of work schedules. The technology exists; 



2612 



rt remains to exploit its full potential, and this could be the prototype program. Advanced 
technology lowers per student cost. Improves accessibility, and encourages a paredigm shift 
In our approach to higher education. Studertts do not have to be at a specific location, but 
rather they can Interact with professors and other students electronically. They will develop 
and practice the same skills required In project management in the aviation industry. 

Aviation aerospace developments are increasingly team oriented projects where 
participants are required to develop their specialties on-site - with proper use of technology 
productivity can t>e Increased substantially. New students and adult leamera can benefit from 
education programs that make extensive use of this technology - technkal breakthroughs and 
innovative design and managerial techniques will be stimulated through wMespread familiarity 
with this process. j 

What we are seeking jis a system that promotes 'free' flow of Information among 
students, instructors, industr^ and academia. TYie process win be an on-lirte rather then an 
off-line system. Traditional atademic processes emphasize a detached, theoreticel approach 
that saperates Itself from th^ day-to-day problem solving. This approach certainly has its 
place in the spectrum of Intellectual activity, but I would say that this niche b already amply 

1 

filled by tKie numerous and excellent research universities In the U.S.; moreover, tNs approach 

wiD not close tfie critical thinking gap that threatens our market edge. 

i 
I 

i i^oals 

The specific goals we hope to achieve are listed below: 

1 . The program gives reco(^2ed academic doctoral degree support to a field that reqiires 
high level critical thinking to remain globally competitive. Aviation has borrowed from 
research traditions in other fields, and It is clear that a new paradigm is needed for 
education In the aviatior^ field. 

2. It becomes a device for Accrediting and preparing teachers in aviation. We have yet to 
consolidate our instructional knowledge in ways that demonstrate certain productive 
truths about how Instruction takes place in our industry. By allowing doctorates from 
other disciplines to take 'responsibility for the instruction of our future professionals we 
are saying that our existing instructional systems are fine as they are. This is far from 
the case. An aviation doctorate would enable these teachers to consolidate their aviation 



2613 



knowledge and to impart It in ways so that students learn what works for aviation and 
what does not. j 

3. it focuses the best minds on improving technology and maintaining a competitive edge 
in aviation and in aerospace. Our ability to channel the brain power for aviation 
development suffers by the absence of a doctoral program. There is presently no 'lens" 
through whioh practice oan be analyzed for aviation. Clearly, we require a mechanism 
for intelligent observation of the aviation industry, for tasting the different elements, and 
for applying what we have learned to current aviation probiema. 

4. The proposed structure for the doctorate serves as a bridge to take theory into practice. 
. It organizes and integrates knowledge for productive use in the aerospace industry. The 

application of knowledge in aviation Is accomplished in a rapidly changing environment. 
The kind of work accomplished by aviation doctoratss will lead to the development of 
skills and knowledge that are more immediately applicable to aviation problems so that 
others can 'get on with their jwork' without having to reinvent the jet engine every time 
they see a new problem. | 

5. It builds a neutral resource pool of expertise that can be used in a competitive fashion. 

I 
The industry needs a neural network of aviation experts whose job it is to stimulate the 

1 
free flow of information . among many aviation vsnturas so that they benefit from a 

broader spectrum of initiatives. It will also provide a dispassionate source for assessing 

on-going trends and issusa without the pressure of immediate corporate goals. 

I 

6. It encourages further research and promotes synergistic knowledge creation. There is no 

doubt that aviation contains a wealth of knowledge. This knowledge, however, is not 

systematized nor widely accessible for immediate use In the industry. A cadre of 

professional doctorates Tmked with each other and to students via networked 

communications, however, communicate widely to exchange information, to validate 

concepts and practices, and to work with each other on new research. Students can 

I 
test their learning against the reality in which they work, and in doing so, develop ways 

to make the knowledge immediately productive. Productrvity Increases, and with it, 

global market share. i 

7. Finally, the nucleus created by an aviation doctorate becomes a medium for the new ideas 
and non-traditional approaches to problem-solving in aviation. We are no longer piecing 



2614 



I 



together solutions based (>n assumptions more logical for other disciplines than they are 
for aviation. We begin to f evelop our own understanding of this unique field, and create 
models that will aid the IsO'ger eviation IrKJustry in solving problems. 

i 
^ylaiion information Infrasttucture 
j 
The second part of our' proposal is the creation of en aviation information Infrastruo- 

I 
ture. Embry-Riddle University has the breadth, capability, and intereet in developing aviation 

as a priority. Its international presence is widely recognized, making H a Icey player in 

i 
accumulating and disseminating Information related to the Intematlonal aviation community. 

Most recently. Embry-Riddie v^as granted status as an affiliate campus of the Internatiorwl 

I 
Spacs University, which has designated its main campus location to be Stresbourg, France. 

In addition to this, the University has links into the aviation Industry and regulatory bodies of 

several different countries Including Egypt, Kuwait, China, and Nigeria. It has developed an 

understanding of the global aviation community and is a respected international presence in 

the education of aviation professionals working across the globe. 

The Slqnifloance of Information for Aviati on 

i 
The U.S. eviation industry has two primary concerns: safety and global marketability. 

In both areas there is evidence that our current access to data bases has disabling effects. 

For example, in aviation accident investigations, there are instances in which causation has 

been related to lack of availat^ility of published data on past aircraft performance. Existing 

d9ta bases are at fault in three ways. First, access to databases for aviation is gained 

primarily through accessing a great number of other data bases not directly associated with 

aviation; the descriptors and search strategies differ from those wNch have become 

operationally efficient for aviation. Descriptors lack the amount and type of detail required for 

aviation research, development, and evaluation. Searching these databases normally leads 

to a great number of documents, most of which are not Qemnane to the ptoblem being 

inveatigsted. Secondly, existing databases do not efficiently incorporate Internationally 

produced documents. Rnally, even if these documents had been located, direct access to the 

contents of the documents ia limited by time arKl space. There is no service an accident 

investigator, airiine manager, manufacturer, or researcher cen access to obtain documents 

immediately et their locations. On-line libraries for aviation simply do not exist. There Is every 



2615 



reason to believe that In some safety incidents, the availability of this information would have 
mede a different In Ih/es which could have been saved and in dollars which would have not 
been lost. 

On-line infornnation for aviation also has economic irnplications in positioning a nation 
to develop and marlcet advanced aviation technologies to the world at large. Without this kind 
of systematized information, whole economies can detdriorate. Knowledge is income, 
especially In our increasingly knowledge-based economy. If the US is to maintain Its 
leadership in the development of aviation end aerospace technologies, we, too, must 
recognize that the same lack of systematized, immediately available aviation knowledge that 
resulted in the New York City crash can lead the U.S. Aviation industry to a crash of the same 
magnitude. 

The U.S. aviation tndu^ry is distressed. Weekly shifts in strategies in order to keep 
airiinas and manufacturers afloat are publicized. The White House is well aware of the 
significance of tfiese figures. Secretary of Transportation Pena noted in a recent speech in 
February: 

'The U.S aviation industry is a barometer of the health of the American 
economy and a benchmark for our glotial competitiveness. Now the indteators 
are flasfiing alarm signjs. As a mainstay of our economy and as an engine of 
new techrMlogy, the president shares my belief that restoring the strength of 
the aviation Industry : is a crucial element of the administration's overall 
economlo recovery strategy.* 

i 

I Avion, February 24, 1 093, page 1 

Adequate information flow is, an esaential element to maintaining both US safety and eco- 
nomio leadership in the woria avietion milieu. 

While libraries and databases exist, coordination between them and access to 
documents, books, articles, 'arvi materials is unacceptably limited. In many ways these 
libraries and repositories have become obstacles to information rather than gateways that 
yield information. The two! barriers are physical location and dumsy, inefficient search 
mechanisms that are ili-suitBd to investigating aviation concerns. The answer lies in the 

development of on*line access to documents and database indexing services using terminology 

I 
af>d categorizations in common use In aviation arKl aerospace. 



2616 



The Meqninq of Information Flow for U.S. Aviation . 

I 
Deficiencies in current document and database access for aviation are in aix main 

! 

areas: 

I 

I 

Clesrtnghouse: There is no cerrtrai point to which e person doing raeearch. evaluation, 
and development can go tojfmd out what has been done in government, industry, DOD, 
university, and internationalty. 

iMck of quick, remotely accessible databases: Accident investigation occurring on-site 
is at the present time lianipered by laclc of access to databases that might help the 

investigator better analyze the accident while the site is still unaltered. 

I 
Complicated search mechanisms that have limited utility for aviation: Aviation is 

interdisciplinary by nature. Existing data bases for otiier disciplines have a good deal of other 

non-pertinent material that interferes with an efPicient search for aviation purposes. 

International databases are not integrated with domestic sources: Access to 

International databasas is important for both safety and commerce. International information 

is desired but priority for systematizing ft for access appears low. Direct examples of ttie 

effects of this lack of integration can too easily fourxl in aviation annals. ICAO is behind two 

to three years in developing Its accident data base exchange. While NATO has taken steps 

I 
to develop some International data bases on aerospace terminology through th« Advisory 

Group for Aerospace Research and Development (A6ARD). the scope is still limited 

considering {)ast economic and safety needs. There oxists no reliable non-proprietary 

international database to serve U S aviation needs. Access to non-English data ia extremely 

limited, so US aviation has no means of Obtainir>g international perspectives. 

l.ack of integration of government-sponsored and non-profit libraries: FAA libraries are 
not well-linked for research, development, or evaluation. While the FAA and MTSB have been 
major producers of aviation information and documents in demand by the aviation industry, 
access to these documents is not possible through on-line systems nor through a 
consolidated search approach. One library does not have access to information on the 
holdings in another. Search mechanisms differ, and collections are not coordinated. 

Lack of Information on funded aviation research: Finally, in developing new 
initiatives, in providing industry with the latest information achieved through government 



2617 



funded research, there is no database contairdng information on what has been done whara, 

5 

by whom, and with what resutta. 



la an otvnne Igirarv raaulred fof U.8. aviation devfllnfimant? 

The role of fnformation flow as a major influence in aviation and aerospace commerce 

is rapld/y gaining attenp'on ori an international scale. Information flow and access has global 

market value. Recant forays' of Aaroapatiale in manufacturing general aviation aircraft and 

per>etratir>g the U.S. marlcet tvficata a loss in U.S. competith^ness in this area. There is no 

I 
doubt that our lack of Information flow wItNn the industry was a contributing factor to this 

I 

I 
loss. I 

i 

RemotB aooOM to on-lir>e information l« essential because the aviation industry 

operates in a geegraphtcel/y dispersed manner. Qeographic diveraitY has been and will 

I 
eor^nue to be the norm In aviation operations. But the need for on-site access to Information 

i 
Is incraasingiy recognized as signifk:ant, and lack of access has a direct effect on 

i 
productivity. ! 

By the same token, ayiatfon and aerospace information is produced at many different 

I 
geographic locatfons. The development of aviation information is widely disbursed and 

requires access to infornftation about whet has been researched before. Researcher 

productivity hinges on on-GniB access capability. 

In completing advanopd degree work in aviation and aerospace access to specialized 

i 
aviation/aerospace material? is importam. It has to be physically accessible. Studerrts need 

the ablHty to examine the materials dlrectiy wherever they are. 

Perfuips the most cofnpeOing arguments for an on-line aviation library can be found 
beyond our own airspace. ^ the purposes of aecuring global skies for U.S. aircraft and for 
creating a truly global pre$ence in future wortd-wMe air transportation, it is becoming 
increasingly important that fpreign entities be gh^n eccess to a streamlined, user-friendly on- 
line aviation library. More than ever before, international cooperation Is required for the 
security of U.S. citizens and aircraft operating in other natior^. They require current, 
complete information to m^ke decisions for their own domestic and international service, 
including information on aircraft performance, airspace management, policy options, and 



2618 



software applioatiorks for aviation to name a few. Here, again, as before, more complete 
acceaa will enable more Informed choices to support a global aviation economy. An online 
library la essential to support U.S. involvement In global commercial Initlativea, to support 
information needs of aviation workera (lrK:ludino PAA, NTSB, end NASA workers) wherever 
they are, to support researcher productivity In suppon of advancement of the U.S. aviation 
industry, to preserve the history of aviation development, and to provide a solid, accessible 
icnowledge base for the development of future aviation professionals In undergraduate end 
graduate programs. 

Development of this on-line library calls for a sensitivity to the ways in which the 
information will be used in the multiple types of aviation applications. The provider should 
have an operational understanding of the interdisciplinary make-up of aviation and how 
knowledge cen be orgenized to meet these needs. 

B»niir# fjompononfa 

Orv-line Library Service should consist of two major parts: <1) on-line documents, and 
(21 intelligent, friendly gateways to (a) other related Indices, (b) other documente, and (o) 
on-going non-proprietary research. Complete documents should be available for on-line 
examination and acquisition in the form the user requires. Access means it should provide 
gateways to national data bases such as ttie NTSB Reports and data, CAMI, FAA libraries. 
Defense Technical inf ormetton Center (OTIC), Nadonai Engineering Education Delivery Service 
(NEEDS)) National Engir^eering Information Service (NEIS). AGARD. end NASA On-line 
services. It should also make international databases more accessible and irwlude ICAO date, 
and reports published by foreign governments. 

HexIblUtY of use is a second important criterion. The display and form in which the 
information is received should allow the user to manipulate it to meet operational, research, 
and financial needs. > 

The on-line library should also be reOable an<f eonsfstant. Users shouM be able to 
routinely access rt v«rhen ttiey|want It and rely on the Information they receive. 

Electronic manipulation of copyrighted documents still presents issues for publishers 
and UMrs silks, while many arximalies exist that can impact the availability of documents in 
an on-line format. In tfie past few years' strides have been made In the development of 



2619 



poiiciAS that both protect the rights of authors/ putilishers and enabia on^ne access. Libraries 

I 
cuch as those at Illinois Institute of Technology CoBoge of Law and Case Western University 

hsve been irviovative in thoir approach. They have developed foundations for copyright 

I 
negotiation to which we canjloolc In creating policy for thd aviation orv-llna service. 

i 
A graat many aviation resources, however, ere government publications end require 

no copyright clearance for on^Vne use. Embry-RIddie anticipates being able to seen and index 

these materiels so that much greater access wID be possible wHhin a relatively short time 

frame. Using tliis approach, coordinated user access to FAA libraries, CAMi, NTSB, and lAC. 

to name a few, can be acquijred. 

I . 

Approach to On-Bne Infonnatfon Service 



The on-line service WBI be developed over e four year period using an integrated 

i 

approach. During tt>e first year the eieinents to be put on-Hne and integrated through a 
gateway wlB be identified. ^fererKe librerians at Embry-Riddte are experienced in linldng 
aviation resources with user 'needs. Their OKpertise wiH provide the ir>itial fourtdation for tfw 
architecture of the system, in conjunction with software engineers, they will formulate tfw 
aystem reqiiremants, which wDI be vaDdated by external experts provided by the FAA, NASA, 
ar)d NTSB. The priority for digitizing information will be defined, and the requirements for an 
aviation-specific user interface with existing databases will be generated. Our plan is to use 
the gateway design of DTIC aa a basis for the design for the aviation Interface. By exporting 
the ercfiitecture from a deferise initiative we feel we are transferring a technology to a usable 
format by ttw commercial and gerwral aviation industry. Ttie software wRI be adapted for 
aviation descriptors and use. Negotiations with CCC and otiier holders of copyright will be 
completed, and oopyright marMgement software will be In place to track end manage use. 
Our goal is to rrtake ttte library self-sustaining within four years. 

gaet 

We estimate tfiat both the doctoral program end the orHine aviation information 
systems can be implemented for 8.0 million doUars over a four year period. This money would 
be needed in increments of three miNlon dollars the first year and two, two end one million 



2620 



doNart in succeedino years. No funding required In the-fifth year. The first year's cost of 3 
minion (Miara will be distributed aa followa: 





RKIUIRED FUNDING FOR FY 94 








(In Mllons Of Dollars) 




Doctoral Prnnram 
Faculty & Staff 


.18 


OrHJne Library 
Infonnation Inf nmtn int. m 

Staff 


.1 


Advartislnfl 
Scholarahipe 
Operations 
Hardware & Software 




.2 
.2 
.1 


Ubrary Aoquisitiona 
Copyrioht 
Adverdsino 
Hardware & Software 


.3 

.1 

.08 


GRAND TOTAL 




1.48 




1.60 
3.03 



Detailed cost breakouts and projectlor^ are contained in internal planning documents 

ttiat can be provided on requeJM. This funding will cover the technical vnd persoi>nel costs 

I 
to get both of these programsioff to an excellent start. Because of the unique nature of the 

delivsry systems, we will not require eny fur\dlng for "bricks and mortar* - In l(eep|r)g with 

the miseion, we need electronic buldlnga rather than tradltionei campus buildirtga. We faei 

tfwt both programs will be self sufficient after 4 years; we are convinced that there Is s r)eed 

I 
I 

and tfvst IrHlustry and students wW recognize tho inherent 'value addad" that derives from 

I 
education and the knowledge base. Relatively modest user charge fees oan keep both 

programs eoivent and growing. 



Ponriirfon 
I 

There are severe and (iontinuing problems in the eviation aerospace Industry. We are 

proposing a "synergistlo" two part approach to "higNlght' the urger>cy of the situation and 

I 

implement a cooperative education oriented solution. Because of t}>e uniqueness and the 

I 
urgency of the program, it cannot be implemented through traditional structures - It needs 

i 

the vision and oommitmant ;of an acNevement oriented Congress. Ws have the mission, 
commitment, knowledge, int^rruitional reputation and experience to lead a collaborative effort 
of industry, academia, and goverrunent to develop and implement tliese programs. 



2621 

FORT BERTHOLD INDIAN RESERVATION 
STATEMENT OF WILBUR D. WILKINSON, TRIBAL CHAIRMAN 

Mr . ChaLnnan : 

My name is Wiliar Dala Wilkinson. I am Tribal Chalr^Lain cf 
the Three Affiliated Tribes on the Fort Berthold Reservation in 
western North Dakota. 

On October 30, 1992, Public Law 102-575 became reality for 
Three Affiliated Tribes. Title 35 of this law, called the "Three 
Affiliated Tribes Equitable Comcensation Act", established a 
5149. 2 million Recovery Innd for the taking of 15 6,000 acres cf 
bottomlainds which the FederaJ. Government took frcm the Mandan, 
Hidatsa, and Arikaxa people to build the Garrison Dam. 

P.L. 102-575 aJ-so addresses the transfer of certain lands 
along the shore of the Garrison Reservoir, now called Lake 
Sakakawea, and it states in Section 3503 that "Congress concurs 
in the (Joint Tribal) Advisory Committee's findings and 
conclusions that the United States did not justly compensate such 
Tribes when it acquired those lamds". It further states in 
Section 3506 that eligibility for other services are not 
affected. It reads; "no payments pursuant to this title shall 
result in the reduction, or the denial of any Federal services or 
programs that the Three Affiliated Tribes ... or any of their 
members, are otherwise entitled to, or eligible for, because of 
their status as a federally recognised Indian tribe or member 
pursuant to Federal law" . 

The Joint Tribal Advisory Committee was established by the 
Secretary of the Interior on May 10, 1985, for the purpose of 
assessing the impacts of the Garrison Dam on the Three Affiliated 
Tribes. In its Final Report, submitted on May 23, 1986, the 
Final Report finds amd recommends that "the tribes are entitled 
to the replacement of infrastructure destroyed by Federal' action: 
health care facilities, school dormitories, a bridge for access 



2622 



between the communities and the central facilities, eind adequate 
secondary access roads". 

Mr. Chairman, the Three Affiliated Tribes mean to hold 
Congress to its concurrence of the JTAC commission's findings and 
recommendations . No eimount of money could compensate us for the 
loss of our precious homelands; the rich, fertile bottomlands on 
which we achieved an independent, self-sufficient lifestyle. 40 
years after this devastating loss, our people are still suffering 
from the effects through unemployment, disease, and poverty. 
These lands can never be returned; not after 40 years under the 
waters of Lake Sakakawea. This huge lake, which splits our 
reservation in half, has represented defeat for our people. 

Utilizing the tremendous tourism potential of this lake, we 
want to turn it into a symbol of triumph. We aure entitled to and 
we deserve to benefit from the opportunities that Lake Sakakawea 
presents. That is why I am here today; to ask Congress for $19 
million to develop the access roads to this lake. 

There are 14 sites along the shores of Lake Sakakawea that 
have come under the authority of the Secretary of the Interior 
for transfer to the Three Affiliated Tribes emd individual Indian 
and non-Indian landowners through the Three Affiliated Tribes 
Equitable Compensation Act. This is a complex issue which we 
hope to expedite through the Secretary of the Interior. 
Secretary Babbitt has given us his commitment that he will come 
up with a plan for conveyance of those lamds in the very near 
future . 

I have met with North Dakota Governor Ed Schafer and 
conveyed to him our intent to develop the tourism potential of 
this huge lake . The Governor and I have come to understand that 
any kind of infrastructure development of Lake SaJcakawea Ceui only 
benefit all citizens of the state of North Dakota through an 
increased influx in tourism dollairs. 



2623 



The roads that aire currently serving these 14 recreation 
sites aure unpaved and quickly deteriorate the closer they are to 
the lake. Many of the roads near the lake are two-wheel track 
ruts. 

We plan to utilize the lake to its fullest potential. 
Initiatives are in place to promote tourism and recreational 
travel. However, we cannot capitalize on them if the roads are 
inadequate and unsafe. Travelers are not likely to return if 
they encounter difficulty in gaining access to the lake. 

How will the Three Affiliated Tribes benefit? Through the 
jobs that this road construction will provide and better roads 
once they are completed, improving the delivery of services. 

Unemployment on Fort Berthold is approximately 80%, which 
meams that there an existing workforce readily available. Bureau 
of Labor statistics indicate that there are 2,224 people 
available for work in the immediate vicinity of. the reservation. 
We feel that the millions of dollars coming into our reservation 
will greatly improve efforts to develop our depressed economy as 
we adjust to future opportunities. 

Mr. Chairman, I agree with President Clinton when he- says 
that America's infrastructure is crumbling and he is committed to 
restoring it. Our infrastructure did not have a chance to 
crumble; it was completely destroyed. What replaced it was 
totally inadequate and we need the financial resources to replace 
it. 

LAKE SAKAKAWEA SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE THREE AFFILIATED 
TRIBES OF THE FORT BERTHOLD RESERVATION IN NORTH DAKOTA 

Request : improved road access to 14 bays or parks at Lake 
Sakakawea on the Ft. Berthold Reservation for development of 
shoreline recreational opportunities for Indian and non-Indian 
communities. Cost: $19.4 million. 

Background : The construction of the Garrison Dam (part of 
the Pick Sloan Program) resulted in the flooding of one-quarter, 
or over 150,000 acres, of the Three Affiliated Tribes' land, with 
94% of the flood area being prime agricultural land. The 
remaining part of the reservation was divided into 5 waterbound 
areas. Much of the infrastructure of the reservation was lost, 
and eighty percent of the Tribes' members were forced from their 



2624 



homes. The Secretary of the Interior appointed a Commission to 
make recommendations on compensation to the Three Affiliated and 
the Standing Rock Sioux Tribes, and this report was completed in 
1986. The report aoeetfleally recommended da veloprnftnt- of 
shoreline recre ational potential . 

Need . Even though the potential for shoreline development on 
Lake Sakakawea is great, as evidenced by the many of f -reservation 
public recreation sites (for boating, swimming, fishing and 
camping) on the lake, the Tribe has seen very little benefit from 
the lake which was created at the expense of its homes and best 
agricultural land. The Tribe currently manages four recreation 
sites on the Lake, all of which are underdeveloped. Development 
of the shoreline, and access to it, is an integral part of the 
Tribe's plans to increase tourism and other economic enterprises. 

Congressional Intent on .<5hQrellne Development, In 1992, 
Congress accepted the recommendations of the 1986 Commission 
report by enacting the Three Affiliated Tribes and Standing Rock 
Sioux Tribe Equitable Compensation Program (P.L. 102-575). 

Senate Report 102-267 noted the $149 million compensation 
settlement for the Three Affiliated Tribes from which they will 
receive the interest derived therefrom beginning in FY1998. The 
Senate Report noted that the Commission report recommended 
secondary and access roads as replacement infrastructure, and 
stated at page 191: 

The Committee nevertheless believes that every effort 
should be made by the Administration and the Congress to 
provide additional federal funding through annual 
appropriations for these infrastructure priorities, 
taking into account that JTAC deemed several of these 
infrastructure replacement needs to be urgent and 
critical five years ago. 

Immediate Jobs Creation . Work can begin immediately on this 
project, including field surveys, environmental and archaeological 
assessment, grading and draining of roads, and construction of boat 
ramps and docks. Many of the employees will be tribal members, a 
critical fact in light of the fact that 80% of the Tribes' adult 
members are available for work. 



[CLERK'S NOTE. --The remaining attachments to this 
statement could not be printed in the hearing record but are 
available for review in the subcommittee files.] 



2625 



GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY 

STATEMENT OF REV. WILLIAM L. GEORGE, S.J. AND 
REV. T. BYRON COLLINS, S.J. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, we are Rev. William L. George, S.J. and 
Rev. T. Byron Collins, S.J., assistants to the president of Georgetown University. Thank you 
for the opportunity to testify on the subject of the Fuel Cell Bus Program. We would like to 
congratulate the Committee for having the foresight to sponsor the innovative Fuel Cell Bus 
Program. It stands as an exemplar of the new technologies that President Clinton has proposed 
to -use in dealing with our nation's problems. 

We would like to thank the Committee for the continuing support of this vital fuel cell 
powered bus program in two areas. First your support for the continuation of the Phase II effort 
which will result in the roll-out of the first of these advanced buses as scheduled in September 
of this year. And if all goes well, we also expect to display the first bus at the American Public 
Transit Association (APT A), International Public Transit Expo '93 in New Orleans in October. 
Equally important, your support for the non-recurring engineering and tooling costs that will 
allow the fuel cells for the production version of these buses to be produced in the United States 
is appreciated. This is a positive step in bringing back to the U.S. the advanced technology 
which originated here and it will create much needed manufacturing jobs. 
Continuation of the Fuel Cell Bus Prototype 

We request the Committee to provide $2.5 million in FY'94 for the continuation of the 
Phase II Fuel Cell Bus Prototype effort and the start of the Phase III test program. $1.0 million 
should be designated for the improvement of the 30ft. Phosphoric Acid Fuel Cell Bus Reformer. 
To date the committee has appropriated approximately $6.0 million for this effort which has 
resulted in the design and development of the three advanced fuel cell powered transit buses to 
be delivered in the current Phase II program. The testing program, Phase III will require an 
additional $1.0 million in FY'9S to complete. 

Tests and analysis to date indicate that these first generation buses will perform as 
expected and that the production units will exceed performance offered by current diesel 
powered buses in terms of near zero emissions, fuel economy, passenger acceptance and life 



2626 



cycle costs. We expect the testing of these buses will provide all the data we need to allow us 
to go into production for buses that will meet the needs of any public transit agency. 
Domestic Fuel Cell Commercialization Program 

We also ask the Committee to provide $12 million in FY'94 to continue the funding 
provided in FY'93 of $5.1 million for the non-recurring costs required to produce a U.S. 
designed phosphoric acid fuel cell system for these buses. The fuel cells to be used for the first 
three buses in the Phase II program, while initially designed in the U.S. have been licensed and 
built in Japan. The time phasing of this effort will allow us to use U.S. built fuel cell systems 
for the next buses to be built for the fleet testing program. This program will have buses 
operating in several transit properties across the country. Attached is the multi-year program 
for the U.S. produced Fuel Cell Bus System. 

Again, as we mentioned in our FY '93 testimony, this bus program is the pathfinder 
program for the application of fuel cells for transportation and has given us a significant 
worldwide lead. We have already been informed that transit properties in many states wish to 
place an order for these buses as soon as possible. Your continued support for this program will 
allow us to maintain that lead and perhaps open up opportunities to export these buses to other 
countries where environmental problems are even more severe than those in our country. 

On behalf of Rev. Leo J. O'Donovan, S.J., President of Georgetown University, we 
thank you for the opportunity to testify. 



2627 

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

STATEMENT OF WAYNE SHACKELFORD, COMMISSIONER 

The Georgia Department of Transportation appreciates the 
opportunity to submit testimony to the Senate Appropriations 
Subcommittee on Transportation in support of funding priorities within the 
state of Georgia. 

The Department has worked in good faith to comply fully with the 
investment criteria provided by the House Subcommittee on 
Transportation, and the Department will be pleased to furnish any 
additional information the Subcommittee may need to evaluate the merits 
of the Department's Fiscal 1994 funding requests. 

Overview 

Consistent with the federal Intermodal Surface Transportation 
Efllciency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). the Georgia Department of Transportation 
has developed a comprehensive state-wide program of Intermodalism and 
integration. Topping our list is the Atlanta Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal. 
When completed, this terminal will be a model of the interface of regional 
buses, commuter and inter-city rail, transit and landslde conmierclal 
aviation. Such a broad-based facility will ensure the Atlanta regional area 
will be able to accommodate the wide variety of transportation needs which 
support economic and social development in this high-growth area of the 
country. 

While the ability to accommodate increasing volumes of commuters 
into the Atlanta regional area will be greatly enhanced by the Atlanta 
Intermodal Terminal Facility, its impact will be strengthened by the 
continuation and expansion of work in Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems 
(rVHS). Therefore, the Georgia Department of Transportation requests 
priority funding of the Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS). This 
Is state-of-the-art technology which both informs the traveling public of 
traillc conditions and advances public Scifety through the rapid dispatch of 
incident management vehicles which assist travelers and remove stalled or 
accident vehicles detected by the surveillance system. The Georgia 
Department of Transportation feels it is In the best public interest to extend 
current operations outside of the 1-285 corridor to reach the suburban 
Atlanta area where congestion starts. Expansion of the ATMS will also 
permit a larger return of public Investment and provide a more 
comprehensive traffic management strategy for the 1996 Olympics. 

In addition to future site planning, the Georgia Department of 
Transportation makes a firm commitment to the preservation, 
maintenance, and upgrade of existing transportation facilities. Toward this 
end. the fiscal 1994 budget request highlights one project from three 
primary surface transportation areas: bridge, highway, and rail. The 
projects for which the Department requests funding are: the Sidney Lanier 
Bridge Replacement Program, the Lake Lanier Access Road Project, and the 
Local Freight Assistance Program. 



2628 



The Atlanta Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal 

The Atlanta Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal facility embodies the 
movement within the state of Georgia to actualize the Intermodal goals set 
forth by Congress In the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act 
of 1991. Upon completion, the Atlanta Terminal Facility will serve upwards 
of 5.5 million passengers annually as a point of connection for air. rail and 
bus facilities. (A detailed analysis of patronage projections in included in 
Appendix 1-A). 

The city of Atlanta is a focal point of the southern region's 
transportation and shipping activities, acting as a hub for both national 
passenger and freight as well as international transport. (A detailed map of 
rail services, both current and projected, is included in Appendix 1-B) In 
addition, Atlanta has been chosen the site of the 1996 Summer Olympic 
Games. The availability of integrated transportation facilities within the 
metropolitan area will provide not only Increased efficiency In meeting 
commuter needs, but will serve as a model of our national commitment to 
an intermodal approach to transportation management. 

Preliminary studies estimate the construction and operation of the 
Adanta terminal facility would result in an economic Impact of more than 
$400 million and the creation of 8,000 Jobs. ( A detailed economic impact 
analysis Is Included in Appendix 1-C). The central location of the facility 
would provide immediate access to the southern Central Business District 
of Atlanta as well as destination points serviced by the Metro Atlanta Rapid 
Transit Authority (MARTA) which include Hartsfleld International Airport. 
To expedite air travel and enhance the multi-modal aspect of the terminal, 
airline baggage and ticketing facilities are proposed within the terminal site. 

To the east of the proposed facility is the MARTA Five Points rapid 
rail station and Atlanta's popular downtown shopping and entertainment 
facility. Underground Atlanta. To the west lie the new Georgia Dome, the 
Georgia World Congress Center, and the Omni Arena. To the South lies 
Atlanta's proposed new Federal Building. CA detailed site map is included in 
Appendix 1-D). 

A feasibility study for the Atlanta Multi-Modal Terminal was funded 
by Congress and funding was included in the Intermodal Surface 
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 and in the Fiscal 1993 Appropriations 
for the design and engineering phases of construction. A design detail from 
this study is included in Appendix I-E. This study also included an analysis 
of regional alternatives which may be found in Appendix I-F). 

On the state level, matching funds have been obligated and the 
Georgia Department of Transportation. In partnership with local entities. Is 
initiating design and engineering for the terminal site. Total cost for the 
Atlanta terminal Is estimated at $125,000,000 (One-hundred twenty-five 
million dollars). The Georgia Department of Transportation requests 
$100,000,000 (One-hundred million dollars) to be distributed over three 
years with $40,000,000 (40 million dollars) in each FY94 and FY95 and 
$20,000,000 (20 million dollars) in FY96. 



2629 



Intelligent Vehicle Highway System fIVHSl 
Adyanced Trafilc Management System lATMSl 

As economic and social growth within the state of Georgia continue, 
eyer higher demands are placed on our state's Infrastructure. Efficient use 
of existing and future transportation facilities Is of paramount concern to 
the Georgia Department of Transportation. In response, the Department 
requests funding In the amount of $61,770,000 (61 million. 770 thousand 
dollars) to expand the Adyanced Traffic Management System (ATMS) 
beyond the 1-285 beltway In order to more ably senice the outlying Atlanta 
areas where congestion begins. (An oyerylew of the proposed expansion 
plans are Included In Appendix II-A). 

The ATMS expansion project is comprised of three primary 
components: 

1 . Extend the ATMS geographic area from the current 1-285 boundary 
a total of 56 miles outward along flye heayily congested corridors Into 
the greater Atlanta metropolitan area. 

2. Implement the Adyanced Trayeler Information System (ATIS) as a 
communications facilitator. 

3. Deyelop a comprehenslye and coordinated Incident Management 
Program to Increase public safety and Improve system operations. 



Geographic Expansion and Trafilc Monitoring 

The ATMS project Is a comprehensive strategy for monitoring 
highway congestion. Informing travelers of current traffic flows, and 
dispatching rescue vehicles to remove stalled or accident vehicles, thereby 
Improving public safety and easing congestion. 

The current focus of the ATMS Is restricted to within the 1-285 
corridor bordering the Atlanta metropolitan district. Such boundaries fall to 
adequately address the prevalent traffic patters of suburban travelers and 
carmot alleviate the traffic congestion which will be created by visitors to 
Olympic venues outside the 1-285 corridor. 

The expansion of ATMS outside the current boundaries would 
facilitate regional Interaction and Increase mobility y^thln the metropolitan 
area, especially during the 1996 Olympic Games. Specifically, the 
geographic expansion of ATMS would ease traffic fiows Into and out of the 
Atlanta metropolitan area by targeting suburban travelers approaching 
potential points of congestion and by availing distant travelers to safer and 
more Incident-free trips through the use of Incident management vehicles. 
Of primary Importance In this effort Is the expansion of key monitoring and 
forecasting methods: highway ramp metering systems, urban and 
suburban traffic surveillance, and highway traffic monitoring. 



2630 



Advanced TYaveler Information System (ATIS) 

The ATIS Is the framework for transmitting Information concerning 
potential highway congestion, alternate route advisories, severe weather 
warnings, parking availability and other data to the traveler. Because of Its 
communications role, the ATIS displays must be highly visible, reflect 
Immediate changes, accurately disseminate a variety of data Inputs, and 
appear In a multl-Ungual format to adequately accommodate the Influx of 
foreign visitors entering the Atlanta metropolitan area and proceeding to 
Olympic venues. 

The communications system would receive Input from tralflc sensors, 
video cameras, the MARTA Control Center, and the Atlanta Transportation 
Control Center. In addition to these primary sources, the ATIS must 
accommodate cellular phone Input, regional weather reports, arena parking 
availability and event status. These inputs must then be synthesized and 
broadcasted on Variable Message Signs, Highway Advisory Radio Stations, 
and Interactive Graphic Communications Centers In the state's ten regional 
welcome centers. A key component to the successful dissemination of such 
information will be the placement of Variable Message Signs every five miles 
along 1-285. one of the most congested metropolitan corridors. 

In addition to use by the public sector, access to the communications 
system could be purchased by private users such as hotels, airports, malls 
and other central locations throughout the state further expanding this 
system's sphere of Influence and general availability. 

Incident Management Program 

Incident management is the kingpin of advanced transportation 
management. Once congestion points are identified or accidents are 
detected through the monitoring and surveillance systems, the ATMS must 
be able to act quickly and efficiently to remove traffic flow barriers and 
assist distressed travelers. 

The Incident Management Team would coordinate local police, fire, 
hazardous materials authorities, and other agencies in a comprehensive 
effort to address emergencies which may occur on the transportation 
system. The majority of appropriations in this area will be used to 
purchase 10 Incident management vehicles to assist distressed travelers. 



Cost Summary 

The initial cost estimates for the Advanced Transportation 
Management Sjrstem are: 

Geographic expansion and Traffic Monitoring $56,000,000 

Advanced Traveler Information System (ATIS) $ 5. 120.000 



2631 
Incident Management Program $ 650.000 



total $61,770,000 

Cost of implementing ATMS on these five corridors is estimated at 
$1,000,000 (one miUion) per mile, a total of $56,000,000 (56 million). 
Projected benefits of ATMS have been estimated by the Transportation 
Research Board as "travel delay reductions of 10 to 25 percent... lower 
freight costs from more efilcient use of trucks, reduced pollutant emissions 
from reduced congestion, reduced fuel consumption and several hundred 
lives saved annually." (The Transportation Research Board, Special Report 
232. Advanced Vehicle and Highway Technologies . 1991). 



Sidney Lanier Bridg e 

The Port of Brunswick is located In Glynn County. Georgia. 
Brunswick Port Is one of the two primary seaports within the state. The 
Sidney Lanier Bridge spans the entrance to the Port of Brunswick's harbor. 
(A detailed analysis of the historic economic Impact and future economic 
projections for the Port of Brunswick are Included In Appendix Ill-A) 

The Sidney Lanier Bridge has been hit twice In the past fifteen years, 
and ten lives have been lost due to these collisions. Congress designated 
this bridge a hazard to navigation In the 1990 Coast Guard bill and called 
for its replacement. (A detailed analysis of the threat to public safety and 
the economic costs associated with ship/bridge collisions Is Included in 
Appendix IIl-B) 

A full study of the Sidney Lanier Bridge Replacement Project was 
prepared for the Georgia Department of Transportation by Grelner. Inc. 
The study evaluates alternative solutions, costs and cost efiectlveness, 
environmental concerns, alternative solutions and their associated costs, 
and details the scope of the project. (A summary of this report is Included 
In the Georgia Department of Transportation's FY 94 appropriations 
request In Appendix Ill-C). 

The Department requests $8,500,000 (eight million. 500 thousand) In 
federal funds In Fiscal 1994 to continue the first phase of bridge 
replacement required under the Truman Hobbes Act. 

Lake Lanier Access Road 

The Lake Lanier access road provides a direct connection from 1-985 
in Hall County. Georgia to the state owned facilities know as Lake Lanier 
Islands. Lake Sidney Lanier was constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers between 1952 ad 1957. It Is one of the most heavily visited 
Corps of Engineers facilities In the United States. The Lake Lanier Islands 
consist of four major Islands covering 1.200 acres with 20 miles of 
shoreline. 



2632 



The construction of the Lake Lanier Access Road (the SR347 
relocation project) Is an on-going project within the Georgia Department of 
Transportation for which federal funds have been obligated. To date, the 
Georgia Department of Transportation has received $3,911,000 (three 
million. 911 thousand) of the esUmated cost of $8,019,200 (eight million, 
nineteen thousand and 200 hundred) In federal funds needed to complete 
this project. 

Original Concept 

The original project design for the Lake Lanier Access Road began 
1,400 feet west of the 1-985 Interchange on existing S.R. 347. The project 
called for the symmetric widening of the roadway for 2,500 feet. The 
alignment was to then leave the existing roadway and extend westerly for 
1.4 miles, crossing S.R. 13. Norfolk Southern Railway and McEver Road, 
Intersecting with the existing S.R. 347 alignment to the Lake Lanier Island 
facility. 

The proposal called for 52 feet of pavement (2-12 foot lanes In each 
direction with a four foot flush median). The original concept also called for 
alternate designs which Included: 

I At-grade Intersection at the Norfolk Southern Railway 
(or) 

II A 76 foot wide bridge to be constructed over the railway. 

Because of budgetary constraints Avlthln the federal and state 
governments, the Georgia Department of Transportation has divided the 
original project Into two phases. The first phase (AHL-347(5)1 from State 
Route 365 to Shoreline Drive. Is scheduled to be let In April of 1994. This 
will exhaust the state's funding allocations for the Lake Lanier Access Road. 



New Plan 

The new divided plan consists of limiting the project length from the 
original starting point (1.400 feet west of the 1-985 interchange) to a point 
Just northeast of Shoreline drive. The project will follow the alignment as 
proposed In the original concept. At grade intersections will be constructed 
at S.R. 13 and at McEver Road. A 44 foot wide bridge will be constructed 
over the Norfolk Southern Railway. Phase 1 will only Include construction 
of two lanes on four lanes of right of way. 

The second phase will complete the original concept. Phase I will be 
widened to 52 feet of pavement (2-12 foot lanes in each direction with a 
four foot flush median). The bridge over Norfolk Southern Railway will be 
widened to 76 feet. 

The Department Is requesting $2,600,000 (two million, six hundred 
thousand) In federal assistance to complete construction on this access 
road. 



2633 



Local Freight Assistance Program 

The Georgia Department of Transportation recognizes the Importance 
of a national freight program to assist local communities in maintaining 
and expanding rail facilities. While the program was authorized by 
Congress for Fy94 at a level of $30,000,000 (30 million), no funding has 
been included in the Administration's budget request for this coming flscal 
year. The Georgia Department of Transportation has included a summary 
and recommendations report which was prepared by Wilbur Smith 
Associates detailing the Georgia rail system, its needs, and economic 
impacts on the state. (A copy of this report is included in Appendix IV-A). 

The Georgia Department of Transportation requests full funding of 
the Local Freight Assistance Program, 



Summary of Request 

Atlanta Multi-Modal Terminal Facility 

$100,000,000 over a three year period to be distributed: 
FY94: $40,000,000 
FY95: $40,000,000 
FY96: $20,000,000 

Advanced Tralllc Management System (ATMS) 

$61,770,000 for expansion beyond the 1-285 beltway 

Sidney Lanier Bridge 

$8,500,000 for bridge replacement 

Lake Lanier Access Road 

$2,600,000 for conUnuaUon of project 

Local Freight Assistance Program 

The Georgia Department of Transportation recommends full funding 
of this program. 



A 2634 



APPENDIX I-A 



3.0 PATRONAGE 



3.1 RAIL PATRONAGE 



3.1.1 General 

Long range patronage forecasting is a difficult task under the best of conditions. Forecasts arc 
affected by population and employment, fare costs (subsidized or not subsidized), travel time, 
frequency of service, and access time (walk, auto, transit) at both ends of the rail system. In Georgia, 
and specifically Adanta, there is currently passenger rail service provided by a southbound Amtrak 
train in the morning and a northbound Amtrak train in the evening traveling over NS tracks between 
New York and New Orleans. These trains, plus the excursion service provided by the New Georgia 
Railroad, provide the only Georgia-based data. Therefore, factors on commuter rail service use 
from New York, Chicago, Boston, etc. must be used to develop Atlanta forecasts. The US census 
provides much of the data base, and all the work to date has been based on the 1980 census. New 
material from the 1990 census will be available later this year. Considering the limited funding 
scope of this study, the data to follow are considered very preliminary, and it is easy to envision a 
set of circumstances that could substantially change the forecasts. 

The patronage projections in this Chapter were developed to obtain some general order of magnitude 
for potential patronage and to indicate the relative relationship of Amtrak and commuter rail and 
intercity bus patronage. These distinct interstate and regional services have different characteristics 
which will influence terminal design. According to Amtrak each Amtrak patron, for example, 
attracts 1.6 "meeters and grecters" to the terminal. Due to luggage and other considerations, only 
a small number of Amtrak patrons will transfer to or from M ARTA . Patrons on commuter service, 
being primarily work bound, are much more likely to transfer to or from MARTA with the remainder 
walking to or from their work locations. 

Patronage estimates are provided for a limited number of services during the first year of the ter- 
minal's operation, which is assumed to be 1996. Patronage estimates for all potential services are 
provided for a build out scenario, assumed to be the year 2010. This does not imply that no services 
beyond those offered initially will be available until the year 2010. Neither should it imply that all 
potential services necessarily will be offered by that year. The specific phasing of particular 
commuter rail and intrastate services will depend upon the level of local support and financial 
commitment, costs and available funding, compatibility with existing freight operations and many 
other factors. Detailed planning for each possible line should be carried out to provide the basis 
for specific service proposals. 

3.1.2 Amtrak 

Amtrak patronage forecasts, and annual growth factors were provided by that agency. Actual 1990 
Atlanta patronage on the New York to New Orleans Crescent train was factored to an assumed 1996 
terminal startup year and also to the year 2010, shown as "Buildout" in the Table on page 3-5. For 
startup, provisions have not been made to accommodate the potential Chicago-Miami service. If 
this service becomes viable, several options exist, to include routing through the Decatur Belt and 
using the Crescent platform, or a decision could be made to build the Chicago-Miami platfonm(s). 
Amtrak routes for the eastern United States are shown in Exhibit 3-1. 

It should be noted that the recently enacted Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 
1991 provided funding for high speed rail operations in five as yet undesignated corridors. Amtrak 



2635 



routinely operates at 1 25 mph in the northeastern U.S. These higher speeds, however, require grade 
separated track, large radius curves and a high quality, well maintained track structure. City center 
terminals and existing urban rail corridors can be used, as this type of high speed system can also 
operate at the lower speeds necessary in the city. An up-grading of a segment of railroad in either 
the Crescent or Chicago-Miami corridors might be a reasonable expectation. 

3.1.3 Commuter Service 

Commuter patronage forecasts for service to Greensboro in the east and service to Macon in the 
south were developed in the 1987 MARTA study of commuter rail service in North Georgia. That 
study considered variables of ticket pricing and train speed to terminals at suburban MARTA stations 
of Avondale and East Point, respectively. The developed forecast assumed a considerable fare 
subsidy would be available. 

The Georgia Department of Transponation, through its consultant, Wilbur Smitli and Associates, 
also developed forecasts for rail service using the 1987 MARTA report as a starting point. This 
study considered commuter service to Five Points as an alternative to a transfer to rapid transit at 
the East Point Station and indicated a 5.4% increase in annual patronage for the Five Points terminal. 

Exhibit 3-2 at the end of this chapter illustrates existing railroad corridors with potential for com- 
muter service. Commuter patronage (See table on page 3-5.) used in this study is an expansion of 
patronage from the Georgia Rail proposal by Paul J. Kennedy. That proposal had as its premise 
subsidy-free operation (see section 2. 1 .6). 

The 1 987 MARTA Commuter Rail Study and the patronage report by MARTA 's consultant, Charles 
River Associates, were the initial data source (which in turn was based on 1980 Census data). For 
the Georgia Rail proposal, fares were rai.sed; patronage was reduced and tailored to the service 
provided; projections were expanded to an annual base and divided into the number of rail cars 
assigned to tiie service. This calculation produced an annual forecast of 82,875 passengers per rail 
car. Expanding that number to the service provided on each line would provide annual patronage. 
But, using a table of work trips in the report, two modifications were made: 

• On lines of lower passenger potential, it was assumed that rail cars would not be full 
and volumes were reduced 20 percent. 

• On lines of anticipated higher patron volume, single-car trains were expanded to two- 
or three-car trains, and the patronage increased accordingly. 

As an illustration of the end result, (See table on page 3-5.) the Senoia and LaGrange lines merge 
at Union City with a combined annual patronage forecast of 318,240. The Cartersville and Canton 
lines join in Marietta and were forecasted to handle 1,093,950 annual patrons. More precise 
patronage forecasts should be developed later using sophisticated computer programs and 1990 
census data. 

Year 2000 annual commuter patronage forecasts from the Georgia Rail proposal were the basis of 
developing study patronage forecasts. Year 2000 forecasts were reduced 8% to secure initial year 
Greensboro forecasts and were expanded 20% for year 2010, which was assumed to be buildout. 

3.1.4 Intrastate Service 

Intrastate rail service to Savannah, Macon, Augusta, and Columbus, shown on Exhibit 3-3, have 
been addressed by various planning efforts. The patronage on such a service has not been specifically 
determined. Clearly, detailed studies for such service are beyond the scope of this study but must 
be performed prior to any decision on a specific service. For study purposes, however, one train a 
day in each direction with an annual total of 48,000 patrons in the year 2010 has been assumed. 



2636 



Other intrastate service is provided by Amtrak's Crescent service, with stops in Toccoa, Gainesville, 
and Atlanta. Amtrak's future Chicago-Miami service may further serve Georgia cities such as 
Dalton, Rome, Atlanta, McDonough, Macon, Perry, Cordeic, Fitzgerald, Douglas. Waycross. and 
Folkston. Existing Amtrak service along the east coast of Georgia serves Savannah and Jesup. 

3.1.5 Excursion Trains 

New Georgia Railroad excursion service currently operates from its own terminal under Central 
Avenue at mile post zero. Excursion trains go to Stone Mountain Park, operate on circumferential 
trackage around downtown, and on occasion to distant cities on whistle stop tours. Excursion trains 
offer an important service to Georgia residents and to the tourist and convention business. Annual 
patronage for 1991 is expected to be 67,000. The New Georgia Railroad desires to continue to 
operate from its present location, thus its patronage is not included in the table on page 3-5. 

3.1.6 Olympic Service 

Possible rail service to Stone Mountain Park during the 1996 Olympic Games is an important 
consideration. Currently, the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) is bringing together a team of 
transportation professionals to work with the Atlanta Committee for the Olympic Games (ACOG) 
to develop the Olympic Transportation System Plan. Based on estimates provided to ARC by 
ACOG, nearly 1.5 million persons could attend events at Stone Mountain Park during the 16-day 
period of the games. Maximum daily attendance could exceed 130,000. Tl>e effort led by ARC 
will detemiinc the specific modes to be used for Olympic event transportation to Stone Mountain 
Park and anticipated patronage. This study recognizes some level of Olympic train service origi- 
nating at the multi-modal terminal, but does not provide specific patronage forecasts. 

3.2 BUS PATRONAGE 

The present intercity bus terminal on Inlemational Boulevard is operated by Greyhound Lines, Inc. 
Blue Ridge Trail ways and Southeastem Suges also utilize this terminal. In 1989, the terminal 
handled 598,420 passenger arrivals and 596,676 departures. In September 1991, Greyhound began 
operating a hub system where ahnost all (52) routes terminate or originate in Atlanta. Atlanta's 
bus terminal is intended to be the largest hub operation in the Southeast Based on figures provided 
by Greyhound, this study assumes a minimum patronage of 600,0(X) annual intercity bus passengers 
at project opening (1996). 



2637 



TABLE OF ANNUAL ESTIMATED PATRONAGE 





Annual Passeiigers 


Conimuler Corridors^^ ,-^, 


1996 
-,; OPENING ,- 


2010 
BUILDOUT 


Greensboro 


457,470 


596.700 


Jackson 




159,120 


Bamesville 




596.700 


Senoia 




159.120 


LaGrange 




159,120 


Bremen 




596.700 


Rome 




397,800 


Cartersville 




696,150 


Canton 




397.800 


Gainesville 




238.680 


Athens 




696.150 


::■::■ -Total Commuters ,.,:.,j^,j*^,^. 


:«te^!IM&W; 


,,.4.694,040,.^ 


Intrastate Rail Service 




48.000 


Intercity Bus Service 


600.000 


825.000 


Olympic Service 




- 


Amtrak (Intercity rail) 


216.172 


297,006 


Total Passengers 


1.273,642 


"5.864,046 



NOTES: 

The following assumptions and notes apply to the above table: 

1. All commuter lines terminate/originate at terminal in vicinity of MARTA Five Points Station. 

2. Amtrak provided intercity rail estimates. 

3. Intercity bus service assumed at same growth as Amtrak. 

4. Commuter corridors arranged clockwise from three o'clock. (See Exhibit 3-2.) 

5. Level of Olympic service, if any, and patronage estimates to be determined by Olympic 
Transportation System Plan Study. 



2638 



APPENDIX 1-B 




SOURCE > AMTRAK SYSTEM 

TRAIN TIMETABLES 

EFFECTIVE THROUGH APRIL ^. 199? 



AMTRAK SERVICE 
IN THE EAST/SOUTH 

ATLANTA MULTI-MODAL PASSENGER 
TERMINAL FEASIBILITY STUDY 

EXHIBIT 3-1 



2639 




POTENTIAL COMMUTER 
RAIL CORRIDORS. 
NORTH GEORGIA 

ATLANTA MULTI-MODAL PASSENGER 
TERMINAL FEASIBILITY STUDY 

EXHIBIT 3-2 



2640 



TENNESSEE \ 



EXISTING AMTRAK 
CRESCENT ROUTE 



SOUTH 
CAROLINA 




ALABAMA 



FLORIDA 



POTENTIAL INTRASTATE 
KAIL SERVICE 

ATLANTA MULTl-MOUAL PASSENGER 
TERMINAL FEASiniLITY STUDY 

EXIIIHIT 3-3 



2641 




2642 

APPENDIX I-C 

8.0 ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 



8.1. ASSUMPTIONS 

This study focuses on (he economic impact of the construction and operation of a multi-modal 
transportation facility and its initial phase of operations to (he state of Georgia. Initial operations 
assumed include intercity bus service, the service of one Amtrak line (New York to New Orleans) 
and commuter rail service to Stone Mountain and on to Greensboro. This study also takes into 
account the rail and service yard improvements required for the initial phase of operations. Although 
the potential exists for many commuter rail lines, this study does not attempt to measure the additional 
benefits derived from construction, employment and operation of all commuter rail service possible 
in latter phases, and does not attempt to measure the benefits to specific communities associated 
with, or connected to, the Amtrak or commuter rail lines. 

It should be known that the impact of employment and operations of intercity bus service in the 
proposed multi-modal terminal are considered negligible since they have existed in the downtown 
Atlanta area for some years now. 

It should also be known that employment and operations impacts of a second Amtrak route through 
Atlanta - the Chicago to Miami route - is also considered negligible since Amtrak already operates 
one line of service, constituting a base of operations. A second route through Atlanta would offer 
an insignificant amount of additional employment and income. The construction of Amtrak plat- 
forms, however, as well as the increase in retail sales to downtown Atlanta due to a shift of passengers 
and mceters/greeters to that area, are considered. 

In addition: 

• Facility construction and related expenditures are assumed to be $165,650,000. 

• Facility and initial phase operation expenditures which are new injections to the economy 
are assumed to be $2,000,000. 

• Inducedeconomicimpactcalculationsforexpenditures, employment, and hou.sehold earnings 

are based on the U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis' 1986 RIMS 
II multiplier coefficients. 

• New retail sales impacts to the downtown area are based on 25% of projected daily commuter 

patrons and 60% of projected Amtrak patrons to avoid counting existing retail sales from the 
commuting populace. 

8.2. ECONOMIC IMPACT 

The construction and operation of the multi-modal station in downtown Atlanta and the formation 
of a commuter railroad authority will undoubtedly have a significant economic impact on the Atlanta 
region and the entire state of Georgia. Construction expenditures of more than $165 million to 
build the facility and for track and other structural improvements will represent a direct injection 
into the economy, due to federal funding sought as a chief means or financing. Further induced 
spending through the multiplier effect may result in more than $400 million in expenditures 
throughout Georgia. Georgia's construction industry would gain the equivalent of more than 3,200 
jobs (persons-years of employment) over the duration of the project and additional jobs would be 
generated in order to operate and secure the facility. Total job creation could approach 8,000. 



I 



2643 



In addition to the increase in employment and expenditures throughout the state, station patrons 
would add $7.0 million in retail sales to downtown Atlanta annually, and retail sales would increase 
statewide by as much as $56 million. As a result, retail space absorption would approach 57,000 
square feet in downtown Atlanta and 410,000 square feet for the sute of Georgia. 

Georgia's sales and income tax collections would increase by as much as $10 million. 

Other benefits from an Atlanta multi-modal station and commuter rail would include: 

A more cfncient and more available labor force due to the increase and ease in movement of 
people between communities. 

Closer economic ties between more communities, enabling other Georgia cities and townships 
to share Atlanta's economic opportunities. 

A reduction of automobiles on the state highway system. 

A reduction in air pollution as a result of less traffic. 

A reduction in accidents on the state highway system. 

Reductions in travel times and cost to those traveling on the state's highway system. 

A reaffirmation of downtown Atlanta as the metro region's essential core. 

Confirmation of meiro Atlanta as the transportation and distribution leader among the 

Southeast and Sunbelt cities and on par with the most progressive American and international 
cities. 

8.2.1. Expenditure Impacts 

Construction expenditures - $165,650,000 *a 

Operations expenditures - $2,000,000 'b 

Induced expenditures from constniction $402,231,000 "c 

Induced expenditures from operations 4.107.000 "d 

Total Expenditures Impact $406,338,000 



8.2.2. Employment Impacts 

Construction expenditures 
Operations expenditures 

Induced expenditures from construction 
Induced expenditures from operations 

Total Employment Impact 7,857 



$3,269 


"a 






$39 


•b 










$7,786 


'g 






_^ 


•h 



2644 



8.2.3. Household Earnings Impacts 

Household earnings, construction - $74,533,000 'i 

Household earnings, operations - $1,248,000 j 

induced household earnings, constmction $128,61 1 ,000 

Induced household earnings, operations 1 .468.000 

Total Household Earnings Impact $130,079,000 



'k 
'I 



8.2.4. Retail Sales Impacts 

Retail sales impact, downtown urea 
Retail sales impact, rest of .state 

Total State Retail Sales Impact 

Retail employment impact, downtown 
Retail sales impact, rest of State 

Total Slate Retail Employment Impact 



$ 7,076,000 
48.685.000 

$55,761,000 

114 
705 

819 



m 



Retail space absorption impact, downtown 
Retail space absorption impact, rest of state 

Total State Retail Space Absorption linpact 



57,000 sq.ft. 
352.500 SQ.fL 

409.500 sq.fL 



8.2.5. Tax Impacts 

Sales tax impact from retail sales, downtown 
Sales tax impact from retail sales, rest of state 

Total Stale Sales Tax Impact from Retail Sales 

State income tax impact from added eiTjployment 

Total State Minimuin Tax Impact 



$ 283,040 
1,947,409 


's 


2.230.440 


's 


7,700,000 


't 


$9,930,440 





2645 



ti "aii I'il 

I • i - > n !' 



jiii! 

ll2ili 



e c 



ill 



■ ill 

> s " s 



an 



11 



i mj 



i 
i'lil 

nil 



i i i i ! 3 i 

>■ s I »' ! ; 1 



tlii'lil 

nii li! 

T 3 t a 3 i 3 



Mii'ii 

i Hi 1 i 

i - i 1 7 1 



i'lil 
i lii 



! mil 

! i i a E i 



li'i'iii 
M t Ifj 

^ f f at:! 



2 IMiS'iiii'iii i 

E iiiii Hit Hi i 

i i i • 3 f r f t T d r j" j" 



HI 

a } i 

a i ' 



,1 



iiSiili'liiS 
itititi till 

• a s 3 i - a • " J 

lilll'l 3 

!!"?• * ! 

liiii'i I 
aiMi * 3 



Elili'l 
3I«SI « 

iilii'l 
iiiii » 



Iilii'l 
nssi; « 

niii'i 

!i«!l « 

Iilii'l 
iiiii * 

liiil'i 
iiMi; « 

Iilii'l 
!!'-!' ' 

niii'i 

51! si • 



iiiii'i 
iiiii • 

niiri 
iiiii. * 

niii'i 
iiMi • 

IIIII'I 
all 11 • 



Iilii'l ! 
IIMI ■ I 



iilii'l I 

IIMI « i 

•■' J J •' 

I liiii'ilii 
i liiii •ill 



II 
1 1 

a* 

II 
II 

a- 

1" 
ii 



l!lLi.!!nilllj _,i!i!il! 



iliiiliilliilil 



lilir 



Hi i 

3 ; < 3 

133 8 ; 

Hi i 



iii i i 

Hi i 



asE 3 • 

>3<. s 

3ia 3 r 

iji i 

Hi. \ J 

>J.-. ^ 

9)3 2 i 

Hi s° 

all s 5 

33i i 

33S 3 ; 

ai! 5 '■ 

Hi i 

333 8 J 

331 3 



333 3 ; 

33 3 S 

m J .' 



333 3 

Hi i 



333 3 i 

Hi i 



3}> S > 

3ia s 



333 3 i 

Hi 3 



aia 3 < 

Hi i 

ill 3 <■ 

313 3 

-' -' -' a' 

«•> t. 5 

3 < 3 



3 3 i 



li.l 



liiji 





Q 




CO 






C/5 

>- 


1^ 




^ 




< 
2-, 


< J 


1 


«: 


ya 




>j 


?-!5 


m 


■< 


PK 


X 








o 


ij _i 


Ul 


•»i 


s < 




< 


<§ 




z 


E:g 




b. 


1- 

•< 





1 1 



2646 



APPENDIX I-D 




2647 




2648 



APPENDIX 1-B 




2649 




2650 



APPENDIX I-F 



4.0 TERMINAL LOCATIONS CONSIDERED WITHIN 
METROPOLITAN ATLANTA 



4.1 AREA DESCRIPTION 

Metropolitan Atlanta, with its extensive rail network, serves as the hub of two consolidated railroad 
networks, the Norfolk-Southern and CSXT. This network is comprised of both radial and cir- 
cunfiferential, or "beltline", railroad segments. Railroad industry rationalization has had the effect 
of concentrating most freight service onto the radial network, while most beltlines have been 
downgraded to the status of industrial spurs, with junctions severed in some cases. However, beltline 
rightsof way generally are still in place. Atlanta's crucial railroad networks, for the purpose of this 
study, are shown in Exhibit 4-1, at the end of this chapter. 

4.2 GENERAL 

As shown previously on Exhibit 2-1 a number of terminal sites had previously been considered by 
Georgia DOT's consultant Wilbur Smith Associates. This study seeks to focus on the optimal site. 

In evaluating potential locations for a new multi-modal passenger terminal, several systemic con- 
siderations were considered paramount. First, the terminal would need to interface with existing 
MARTA rail transit stations in the region. Second, the terminal would need to be conveniently 
accessible to trains entering Atlanta from any radial railroad. The practical effect of this requirement 
was a focus on locations where reverse movement (backing) of trains would be unnecessary. 
Additionally, physical constraints of the site, impact on surrounding development, and area code- 
velopment potential were considered important factors. 

4.3 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES 

Three locations were considered for development of the multi-modal terminal; Brookwood (in the 
vicinity of Amtrak's existing Peachiree Sution), the MARTA Lindbergh Center Station area, and 
the Downtown Atlanta (Five Points) area. Their evaluation in terms of the referenced criteria is 
explained below. 

4.3.1 Peachtree Station 

Site Physical Limitations - Peachtree Station is wedged between Deering Street and 1-85. 
Currently, trains must stop on the main line, and there is no place for on-site expansion of 
either terminal or track facilities. 

No Link to MARTA System - While plans for MARTA's Northwest Line show a station at 
Peachtree and 25th Streets, neither funding nor approval of this branch is imminerH. 

Adjacent to Residential Areas - Expansion at this site could negatively impact the Brook- 
wood neighborhood. 

Potential Traffic/Circulation Problem - Peacliirec Street is the only facility providing access 
across 1-85 in the area. Additional traffic to the terminal would further congest this facility. 

All Rail Traffic on Norfolk Southern - This site is not accessible from the CSXT system 
without a reverse movement on the Norfolk Southern mainline. 



2651 



Limited Codevelopmcnt Potential - Because of site limitations and the residential character 
of the neighborhood, codevelopment was considered unlikely. 

4.3.2 Lindbergh Center 

Limited Ability loServe Amlrak, Commuter Rail, and Bus - Because of its location outside 
of the downtown area, this site is peripheral to both the commuter travel patterns and the 
central focus of the intercity bus system. 

. Links Only to the MARTA North-South Line - Patrons with destinations served by 
MARTA's East- West Line would have to transfer at Five Points. 

Potential Traffic Circulation Problems - Congestion on the surface streets serving this area 
is already substantial. 

All Rail TrafTic on Norfolk Southern • This site would also require reverse movement for 
all routes not on the Norfolk Southern Mainline. 

Limited Codevelopment Potential - The likely site in this area does not front on a roadway 
in an otherwise auto-oriented, low density, commercial district. Codevelopment is thus 
considered unlikely. 

4.3.3 Do>vntown Atlanta 

Excellent Ability to Serve all Modes in One Location - Downtown is the focus of the radial 
railroad network and was the site of three railroad passenger terminals in the past. Moreover, 
downtown is also the focus of the Interstate highway system and intercity bus routing. 

Link to MARTA's Hub Station is Feasible - Transfer to any line of the MARTA rapid 
transit rail system is most convenient downtown. 

Rail Traffic Not Limited to a Single Line -Rail systems converge on downtown with 
maximum flexibility achievable. 

Good Codevelopment Potential - Downtown offers the potential to develop complementary 
office, retail, and commercial uses that would benefit from traffic in the terminal. 

Major Traffic Generator - Downtown site is accessible to traffic generators thereby offering 
a greater potential for work trips, recreational trips, etc. 

4.4 FINDINGS 

Due to these factors, the work team concluded that downtown Atlanta, in the vicinity of the MARTA 
Five Points Rapid Transit Station, offered the best general location for the multi-modal terminal. 

This conclusion was confirmed by the Project Advisory Team, and all future efforts were focused 
on the downtown Atlanta area. 



2652 




HENnv col SI 



POTENTIAL SITES FOR 
AMTRAK STATION 

ATLANTA Mt)I,TI-MODAI. PASSENGER 
TERMINAL KEASIHILITY STUDY 

EXIIiniT 2-1 



2653 



APPENDIX U-A 



TRAFFIC 
MANAGEMENT , 
CENTER yjjj&- 



DETECTORS 



SIGNALS 



OTHERS 




VEHICLES 



POLICE/ 
EMERGENCY 



2654 



,'>^ 






OLYMPIC VENUES 

MARTA 

HOV 



2655 




\ 



CURRENT 
PROPOSED 



2656 



< 
a 

X 
Q 

u 

< 



< 

z 
z 
o 

H 
U 

a 
O 

H 

Ec 

V) 

z 




<n 






o 






'^ 






CO 












a 












^ 






(D 






U 












« 






E 






e 






c 






O 




a 




c 












ol 




^1 




w 






(Et 








CO 


s 


a> 








> 


. 


^ 


o> 


o 


w 


*— 


o 


c 


(D 




C 


^ 




o 


c» 


a 


c 


a 


liJ 






'c 


•^ 


v> 


o 






C 


a 


o 


^ 


XJ 


o 


<D 


o 


CO 




CD 


> 


a 


E 




h. 




< 


u 

c 






CO 


. 


5 






c 


(0 


CD 




w 


m 


o 


O 




r^ 


ca 


00 




a> 


5 
O 


o 


CD 


(O 


CD 


OJ 


o> 




*" 


o 




u 








3 




O 






CO 





2657 



s 




s 


o 
o 
o 

o" 

IT* 


o 
o 

o 


O 

o 

o 


O 
O 

o 


o 

O 

o 




K1 


•o 


fc 



tl 

si 
si 



o 
o 
o 


o 
o 


o 
o 
o 


o 

o 
o 


o 

o 
o 


o 

o 
o 


o 

o 
o 


o 

o 
o 


o 
o 

C3 


O 
O 
CD 


o 
o 


CO 


o 




o 


s 


o 


R 


CM 




R 





o 
o 
o 


o 
o 
o 


o 
§ 


o 
o 
o 


s 


8 


§ 

o 


§ 

o 


O 
O 

o 


o 
o 
o 


o 

o 

CD 


o 
tn 


o 


^ 


53 


S 


o 


R 






g 


CM 



I 



o 

o 
o 


o 
o 
o 


o 
o 
o 


o 
o 
o 


o 

o 
o 


§ 


o 

g 


o 
o 

o 


o 
o 

o 


o 
o 
o 


o 
o 

CD 




o 


fc 


o 
o 


K( 


o 
in 




ir* 

Kl 


CM 







«2 



o 
o 

CD 


o 
o 
o 


1 


1 


i 


i 


o 
o 
o 


o 

s 


o 
o 
o 


o 
o 
o 


o 
o 

o 


s 

-» 


o 

CM 

•* 


% 


to 
2 


CO 

o 


o 
in 


CO 


Kl 


<M 


5 


R 

o 



o 

« 



X 



3 

2 



a «j 



o 
o 
o 


s 

o 


§ 

o 


1 


S 

o 


1 


S 

o 


o 
o 

o 


O 

o 
o 


o 
o 
o 


o 
o 
o 


CO 


o 

CM 


■o 
in 




in 


o 


IM 


o 

Kl 


Kl 

in 

CM 


5 





I 



i 

o 



? 



o 

s 


o 

s 


o 

g 


o 

g 


o 

g 


o 
o 
o 


§ 

o 


o 
o 
o 


o 
o 
o 


O 

o 
o 


o 
o 
o 


o 

3 


s 

-» 


Kl 

in 


■o 


in 
CO 


o 
in 


•a 

IM 


o 
o 

Kl 


Kl 
»M 


5 


5 



« 



o 
o 
o 



o 
o 
o 



***-•- 



o 
o 
o 

o 

CO 



o 
o 

IM 



2 i 



s - 



^ " 









»M 




1. 


V) 


u 


M 


1 

«l 


1 


w 

1. 

1 


1 


1. 

1 


H 








^ 


(A 


•-» 


a 


o 


— ' 


> 
O 




o 

o. 


3 

< 


4> 
CL 



M Q «A M 

«-* Q. W «-* 

a - a 8. 

e «i X >< 



j| 



•I ,,. 



«-* 

I- •*- 

• u 

c o 

— £ 

it w 

1. 3 

O < 



■S 5 "S 5 

V ID V 

lA. m u. 



4f I-* VI 



Q. O 



S3 — 
D >< 
tn lu 



ceo 

C <0 " 
O £ 3 
I- O < 



2658 




c 
3 



« 

OJ « CO 

— *- m 

'- ^ ® 

o o c. 

a a a 

c X ■>< 

r uj uj 

"" C\J o 



-u 

li 

« z 

'206 
Q« 

oo 
zo 

O a< 
UX 

o « 

HO 
(/) u. 




GO 
CD 



N- 
00 



CD w. 
CD ^ 



to 

(D 
CD 



00 
CJ) 



— 

> 

« 

c 



o 

Ol 
Q. 

C 
m 

c 
o 

T3 
<D 
0) 
CO 



O 

c 



c 



a 



0) 

O 

(D 
OO 
O 



0) 

3 
V) 

C 

o 
O 



3 
CO 

o 

3 
CD 

(Ti 

3 



<0 
Q 



CO 



CO 

o> 



CD 
0) 

u 

3 

o 



2659 



—1 




< 




H5 




a < 




,1S 


— »| 


fc" 




£ «^ 




o 




a. 





> 

so 

u. O 
OU 

oo 

a. > 



"■■^ 




Ul 




. -o 




2. c 




ee w 


M 


c -o 


111 






c > 




h. — 


M 


HI Q 




UJ 


C 




V 




E 






.£ o 


VI 


n Jl 


V 


<^ j< 


> 


W u 


c 


a: o 








V) 










•o 




c 


n 




« 


0. 


•> 


E 




n 


e 


X 








> 
o 


<f 


V 




A« 


■n 


n 






u 


o 


UL 

e 
4-t 


o 


o 




c 



o 2 


M 
V 

M 


o _ 




o S 


c 


o u 


M 


:'2 


3 
CD 


ti 


19 

V 


3 *• 


a 


a. 


° 



1^ 


M 






W 






M M 






-O W 




3 


c •" a -5 




C 


" TS _ 3 




« 

> 
V 


yment 
Create 
jplying 
t to B 




u 


O «. 3 5 






C A M ^ 




_c 


'"H E^ 






(Q 





« 
w w 

i; « w 

^ a. « 

OlO S 

w o •! 

c — .S 
•*>.•■ 

E - ,2 

>> u CQ 
o •> 

















n 




"S 3 




o -o 




o > 




_j ^ 




■o 




« e 




«rf "■ 




« >, 




w •* 






. -o 








re 10 








T3 »> 




•> V 




U. X 




n 1 




H 1 




F 



2660 



EXHIBIT 7-2 

CARGO TONNAGE PROJECTIONS 

UNDER VARYING IMPROVEMENT SCENARIOS 

Brunswick Harbor 



Dry Bulk 



1987 



1.200.000 



2010 
2010 Increased Horizontal 

Slalus Ouo Clearance 



2.065,000 



2.065.000 



2010 
Deepened 
Channel 

2.290.000 



Break 


Bulk 


Liquid 


Bulk 


Aucos 




Total 





325.000 



34.000 



105.00 
1.664,000 



819.000 



34,000 



233.000 
3.151,000 



819.000 



34,000 



269.000 



3,422,000 



829,000 



34.000 



233.000 
3.386.000 



Source: Grciner. Inc., based on interviews with shippers and Georgia Ports Authority 
officials. 



EXHIBIT 7-3 

STATE TOTAL ECONOMIC IMPACTS AND POTENTIAL REDUCTIONS 
UNDER VARYING IMPROVEMENT SCENARIOS 



Total Imoact 


1987 


Ouo 


Sales Revenue 
($ millions) 


$543 


S984 


Personal Income 
(S millions) 


SI24 


$226 


Taxes 
(S millions) 


SIS 


$33 


Jobs 


5.700 . 


6.600 



(A) (B) 

2010 2010 

Status Increased Horizontal 

Clearance 



$996 



$229 

$33.4 
6.700 



(C) 

2010 
Deepened 
Channel 



$1007 



$231 

$33.8 
6.800 



2661 



Potential Reductions In Economic Impacts by 2010 due to: 



Limited Horizontal 
Clearance lfB>-f A^l 



Sales Revenue 
(S millions) 

Personal Income 
(S millions) 

Taxes 
(S millions) 

Jobs 



S12 

$3 

S0.4 
100 



Limited Channel 




DeDth IfCWAII 


Total 


$23 


$35 


$5 


$8 


$0.8 


$L2 


200 


300 



Source; Greincr. Inc. 

APPENDIX III-B 
4.0 BRIDGE COLLISION ANALYSIS 

During the course of this study, maritime interests in Brunswick brought a major issue 
to the attention of the study team concerning public safety and economic losses 
associated with potential future accidents involving the Sidney Lanier Bridge and 
commercial ships. While this issue is only tangentially related to the development 
potential of the Port, the implications of the collision issue on any decision to modify 
or replace the Bridge are sufficiently significant to warrant at least a cursory analysis. 



The Bridge has suffered two significant accidents since its construction in I9S7. In 
1972, a vessel struck the Bridge south of the lift span, knocking a portion of the 
approach roadway into the river. Ten persons were killed and the cost to repair the 
Bridge was $1.3 million. In 1987, a vessel struck the south pier of the lift span. 
Repair costs were $1.36 million and, while there were no deaths as a direct result of 
the accident, one worker was killed during the reconstruction. The specific causes of 
these accidents have been studied previously and will not be discussed further here. 
However, the narrow opening of the Bridge and its proximity to the intersection of 
the East River and Turtle River channels was a contributing factor to at least the 
second accident. 



2662 



While these two incidents occurred over a period of 30 years, maritime interests have 
pointed out that the numbers and sizes of ships calling at the Port have increased 
greatly in recent years, and have claimed that the potential for additional accidents 
has dramatically increased. Based on these discussions, the study team decided to 
conduct a limited further analysis of this possibility. However, it must be stressed 
that this is only a very preliminary analysis, and is based on a series of largely 
untested assumptions. It is presented only to provide the reader with information to 
be used in determining whether a more rigorous and comprehensive analysis is 
warranted. 

4.1 CHANGES IN VESSEL DIMENSIONS 

While the long-term history of the Port of Brunswick has been one of slow growth, 
since I98S, there has been a sharp increase in vessel calls associated primarily with the 
initiation of automobile shipments through facilities at Colonels Island. This shift has 
been accompanied by a dramatic increase in the size of vessels calling at the Port, due 
again primarily to the addition of large auto carriers to the fleet mix. The impact of 
these large vessels on fleet statistics is illustrated in Exhibit 4-1. The dramatic 
increase in gross registered tonnage is reflective of a particularity of the auto 
carriers - their extremely large volumes above the water line, a feature which results 
in large broadside areas. The statistics concerning "swept paths' listed in Exhibit 4-1 
will be explained below. 

Based on discussions with harbor pilots, the study team found that, due to the width 
of the Bridge opening and the fact that prevailing currents under the Bridge are not 
parallel to the channel alignment, ships must "crab* along the channel centerline when 
transiting the bridge. A crab angle of five degrees is often necessary to overcome the 
effect of the current. However, due to the large broadside area of the auto carriers 
(which acts as a sail), during periods of strong winds, the crab angle for these large 



2663 



EXHIBIT 4-1 

CHANGES IN VESSEL STATISTICS 
Brunswick Harbor 





1985 


1986 


1987 


1988 


Average Gross Tonnage 


8.691 


8,828 


12.133 


15,345 


Average Length 


431 ft. 


440 ft. 


487 ft. 


501 ft. 


Average Width 


63 fL 


65 ft. 


72 ft. 


75 ft. 


Average 5' Swept Path' 


97 ft. 


99 ft. 


110 ft. 


116 ft. 


Number of Vessels with 
9* Swept Path over 
180 ft.2 


1 


4 


37 


53 



'Excludes tug-barge traffic. 
2Scc Exhibit 4-2. 

vessels may be 8 to 10 degrees. The impact of these necessary maneuvers on vessel 
clearances in passing under the Bridge is illustrated in Exhibit 4-2. 

For ships such as the salt carrier Cecile Erikson. which has historically been the most 
frequent caller at the Port, the five degree crab still permits the "swept path", or 
effective width, of the ship to be restricted to the center 40 percent of the 200-foot 
channel. However, for a very large car carrier (650 ft. in length. 106 ft. in width), the 
swept path of the vessel during windy conditions may be equal to. or exceed, the 
width of the channel. While such conditions may not exist at all times, it is clear that 
the margin for navigational variation, and the margin of safety, is extremely limited 
for auto carriers transiting the Bridge. 

The increase in average 5 degree swept path for the Brunswick fleet from 1985 to 
1988 appears in Exhibit 4-1. These statistics were developed by identifying the 
lengths and widths of all vessels calling at Brunswick during that period and 
calculating the effective widths of each vessel under various angles of correction for 
current and wind. Also shown is the dramatic increase in the number of vessels 
which, under the right conditions, would have an effective width exceeding 90 percent 
of the total channel width. Since the market analysis indicates that automobiles will 
remain an important component of the future cargo mix, it was assumed for this 
analysis that the mix of vessel types and sizes will remain similar to that existing in 
1988 for the remainder of the study period. 



2664 



\ 



\ 



\ 



V 



\ 



\ 



V 



z 
(/J 

a 
ill 

H 
U 
u 



ac a 

a. 
Q — 
ZX 

o 

H 
cn 



\ 



01 «> 

c j:: 
o CO 



\ 



o 
a 
o 



a 
O 

c 
o 

73 
O 
<A 

<n 

O o 
a " 
5 .9- 

V) JC 

o « 

w « 

2 5 



a 

M 
•> 



i: o 



<A 



<n = 

-£ o 

■o O 

• 9 

= "^ 

O f 

a a 

£ -c 

o 



« 

w 
3 

U. 



t I 
\ I 



o 

I 

♦ • 



c 
« 

o 

c 

« 

m 
I 
a 

£ 

CO 

•o 

o 

o 

o 

o 



o 
o 



o 
o 



o 
o 



1^ 

o 
o 

in 



o 
o 







Z 



So 



o 

CM 



o 

.o 

o 

CM 



o 

0) 



tc 

< 
Ul 

> 



o 

OO 



- o 



- o 



snvo 13SS3A do agawoN 



2665 



4.3 PROJECTED SHIP-BRIDGE ACCIDENTS AND COSTS 

During a recent study of Che possible deepening of Brunswick Harbor, the Savannah 
District, Corps of Engineers developed a simplified analysis of the annual cost of 
ship-bridge collisions involving the Sidney Lanier Bridge. Using the extremely 
limited, but only available, data base of the two previous accidents, the Corps 
calculated that the average structural repair cost of each accident is S2.3 million in 
1987 dollars, the average cost of traffic rerouting during repairs is S8.I million and 
the average time between accidents is IS years based on completion of the Bridge in 
I9S7 and accidents in 1972 and 1987. 

Using an average total accident cost of S10.4 million, and a return period of IS years, 
the Corps projected the average annual cost of ship-bridge accidents to be $340,000. 
However, such accidents are not related to the passage of time, but to events such as 
ship transits which occur during a period of time. With this in mind, it was 
calculated that the two previous accidents occurred following approximately 1,800 and 
2,200 ship calls, each call representing two ship transits. 

If a return period is established based on an average of 2,000 ship calls, the accident 
return period for the Bridge decreases from IS years to approximately three years by 
the year 2010 due to the increase in numbers and sizes of vessels. This is illustrated 
in Exhibit 4-3, where intervals of 2,000 ship calls based on the "size-corrected" 
projection are indicated. Using this decreasing average return period, the Corps' 
analysis was then repeated and the annual risk exposure costs associated with ship- 
bridge collisions were projected. These costs range from approximately $700,000 in 
1990 to nearly S3.S million in 2010 and are shown in Exhibit 4-4. They are discussed 
further in the chapter addressing the cost-effectiveness analysis. 

While the number of ship transits and the size of vessels are certainly contributors to 
projections of the number and severity of accidents, there are many diverse factors 
which must come together to cause an individual incident. Such factors include 
human performance, mechanical operations and failures, meteorological conditions, 
and other factors. As a result, the projections included in Exhibit 4-3 should not be 
interpreted as specific predictions of accidents. 



2666 



4.4 DISCUSSION 

It cannot be over-emphasized that many factors have not been taken into account in 
this cursory analysis. Potential improvements in vessel maneuverability and 
navigation, or restrictions on vessel operations could reduce collision hazards, but 
human factors such as possible vessel crew or pilot error will remain. In addition, the 
potential cost in human lives and in disruption of maritime traffic was not 
considered. Therefore, the projected annual costs indicated in Exhibit 4-4 were 
included in the cost-effectiveness analysis with a great deal of caution. 

If is apparent, however, that the potential for additional accidents involving the 
Bridge is very real. The size of vessels in the world fleet continues to increase. The 
number and size of vessels calling at Brunswick have already increased and arc 
projected to continue to increase. As a result, the study tca.n suggests that, as part of 
the design of a replacement for the Sidney Lanier Bridge, a more rigorous analysis of 
potential bridge collision costs, and bridge and pier protection design benefits be 
considered. 

EXHIBIT 4-4 

PROJECTED ANNUAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH 
SHIP-BRIDGE COLLISIONS FOR EXISTING BRIDGE 

Annual Cost 
Year Prelection 

1990 $ 692.467 

1991 750.491 

1992 813.377 

1993 88I.S32 

1994 955.398 

1995 1.035.454 

1996 1. 122.217 

1997 1.216.251 

1998 1.318,164 

1999 1,428.617 

2000 1.548.325 



26£7 _. 

2001 1,678,064 

2002 1,818.674 

2003 1,971,066 

2004 2,136,228 

2005 2,315,228 

2006 2,509,228 

2007 2,719,484 

2008 2,947,357 

2009 3,194.325 

2010 3,461,987 

In developing such a study, it must be noted that, in one of the two previous accidents 
involving the Bridge, the collision occurred well outside the main span and channel. 
Due to the uniform river depth at the location of the existing structure, impact of a 
ship with the Bridge is physically possible across a wide portion of the approach 
causeway. The recommended design study would include developing a projection of 
ship impact probabilities for each portion of the Bridge for each possible class of 
vessel using the Port, determining the forces which such collisions might involve, 
determining the cost of protection needed to prevent bridge damage at each location, 
and comparing the costs and benefits of protecting each part of the structure to the 
costs and benefits of extending the central span of the Bridge across that portion of 
the river. Only after such an analysis can the most cost-effective combination of span 
length and pier protection be determined. 



2668 

APPENDIX UI-C 

FEASIBILITY AND CONCEPTUAL DESIGN 
STUDY OF ALTERNATIVES FOR 
BRUNSWICK HARBOR ACCESS" 

PHASE I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

I. CONCER NS REGARDING THE SIDNEY LANIER BRIDGE HAVE 
ESCALATED IN R ECENT YEARS. 

The Sidney Lanier Bridge spans the harbor of the Port of Brunswick in Glynn County. 
Georgia (see Exhibit I). Due to port market developments in recent years, and the 
resultant increase in the size and frequency of vessels transiting the Bridge, the 
following concerns have developed: 

• whether the Bridge is constraining the development potential of the Port, 
and 

* whether the Bridge poses a hazard to ship navigation and to motorists. 

The Georgia Department of Transportation retained Grciner in July of 1988 to 
identify the navigational and safety constraints the Sidney Lanier Bridge may impose 
on the Harbor, to determine the Bridge's impact on the development potential of the 
Port and to develop viable, cost-effective, harbor crossing alternatives. 

The study was divided into two phases. Phase I is a feasibility analysis for which this 
document is a summary. For a more detailed discussion of the issues presented in this 
Executive Summary, the reader may refer to the Phase I Final Report. In Phase 11. a 
more in-depth study of specific structural «lternatives. alignments and costs will be 
conducted for those alternatives selected by the Department for further investigation. 

II. BY 2010. NE ARLY $35 MILLION PER YEAR IN REVENUE IMPACTS COULD 
BE FOREGONE DUE TO CONSTRAINTS IMPOSED BY THE LXISTING 
BRIDGE AND CHANNEL C0NFIGURATI6NS . 

Traditionally. Brunswick has been a bulk and breakbulk port with imports comprising 
over 7S percent of total tonnage. Its principal imports are salt, gypsum, potash. 



2669 



EXHIBIT I 

VICINITY MAP 
GLYNN COUNTY 




IPPKOXHarC SCALE IK HH-CS 



LEGEND 



= ==. Navigation Channel 
M-6 Miles From The Ocean 



2670 



perlite, bauxite and more recently, automobiles and oats. Pulp and animal feed are 
the Port's two principal exports. A majority of these cargoes are either consumed or 
produced locally. Growth projections Tor these and new potential commodities were 
made based principally on information collected through an extensive interview 
process with current and potential shippers, Georgia Ports Authority orficials and 
industry experts. These projections arc presented in Table I. 

TABLE 1 

TONNAGE PROJECTIONS FOR THE PORT OF BRUNSWICK 
(THOUSANDS OF SHORT TONS) 





J?97 


l?9S 




PROJECTED 






1999 


lj>?0* 


2000* 


2010* 


Existing Commodities 


1,664 


1.919 


1,975 


2,073 


2,484 


2,776 


New Potential Commodities 


-_ 


... 


4^9 


442 


WQ 


646 


Total Tonnage 


1.664 


1,919 


2,444 


2,515 


3,084 


3,422 



Includes additional tonnage which could transit with a deeper channel 
Source: Greiner, Inc. 



Brunswick's bridge and channel conTigurations have played an important role in the 
development and growth of the Port's market over the years. These configurations 
have impacted the fleet which can call at Brunswick. Based on a review of past 
studies, it was determined that two percent of the general cargo freighter fleet and 85 
percent of the dry bulk carrier fleet serving Atlantic and Gulf ports is constrained in 
MS use of Brunswick Harbor due to the present channel depth limitation of 30 feet. 

Over 30 percent of Brunswick's present shippers said they have experienced problems 
with limited channel depth. Through interviews with both present and potential 
shippers, it was estimated that, by 2010, over 235,000 additional tons of cargo per year 
would be shipped through the Port if the channel were deepened. 

Horizontal bridge clearance was frequently mentioned by present shippers as a 
navigational constraint. Although most shippers have not encountered specific 
problems with the 250-root horizontal clearance between the Bridge's piers, many 



2671 



perceive it to be dangerous, especially for the auto carriers. By 2010, over 36.000 
automobile imports through Brunswick could be foregone annually if bridge 
improvements arc not made. More important, however, the narrow horizontal 
clearance also could potentially constrain harbor deepening. 

The channel depth and horizontal clearance restrictions could result in the following 
annual reductions in statewide economic impacts by 2010: 

REDUCTIONS DUE TO REDUCTIONS DUB TO TOTAL 

LIMITED HORIZONTIAL CLEARANCE LIMITED CHANNEL DEPTH REDUCTIONS 

SALES REVENUE Ui million JM million t35 million 

PERSONAL INCOME t S million t 5 million i 8 million 

TAXES UK.OOO J75O.00O $!.» million 

JOBS 100 JOO *** 

Vertical clearance was cited less frequently by Brunswick's shippers as a hindrance to 
navigation. While clearance may be close, depending on the tides, almost the entire 
bulk fleet and all existing auto carriers can transit the Bridge in its open position of 
139.2 feet at mean high water. While no specific foregone tonnage can be associated 
with vertical bridge clearance problems, the combination of depth and height 
restrictions can result in lost time (which equates to increased operating costs) due to 
the need for ballasting and waiting for tides. It is estimated that current delays cost 
shippers over SIOO.OOO per year in additional operating costs. This delay cost is 
projected to grow to S240,000 per year by 2010 unless bridge and channel 
improvements are made. 



III. THE SIDNEY LANIER BRIDGE POSES A RISK TO BOTH SHIPPERS AND 
MOTORISTS . 



Since its opening in 1937, the Sidney Lanier Bridge has suffered two significant 
accidents; one in 1972 and the second in 1987. Eleven deaths resulted from the 
accidents and the structural repair cost for the Bridge averaged $2.39 million per 
accident (1988 dollars). The narrow opening of the Bridge and its proximity to the 
intersection of the East River and Turtle River channels was a contributing factor in 
the second accident. 

Since 1985, there has been a sharp increase in vessel calls associated primarily with 
the initiation of automobile shipments through facilities at Colonels Island. This shift 
has been accompanied by a dramatic increase in the size of vessels calling at the Port, 



2672 



mainly due to the addition of large auto carriers to the Tleet mix. Vessel calls have 
increased from 72 in I960 to 294 in 1987. Based on average cargo handled per vessel 
in 1987 and Greiner cargo projections, the number of vessel calls per year at 
Brunswick is projected to increase to almost 600 by 2010, resulting in 1,200 annual 
bridge transits. 

These larger, more frequently transiting ships have dramatically increased the 
potential for future accidents. Exhibit 2 illustrates the maneuvers necessary for a 
small salt ship and a large car carrier to transit the Bridge in conditions of high 
winds and strong currents. For a large car carrier (650 feet long, 106 feet wide), the 
effective width or "swept path" of the vessel during these conditions may be equal to, 
or exceed, the width of the channel, greatly increasing the potential for an accident. 

Through reviewing the harbor pilot's log, it was determined that the two previous 
accidents occurred following approximately 1,800 and 2,200 ship calls, each call 
representing two ship transits. If a return period is established based on an average of 
2,000 ship calls, the accident return period for the bridge decreases from every IS 
years to approximately three years by the year 2010 due to the increase in numbers 
and sizes of vessels. 

These return period projections should not be interpreted as specific predictions of 
accidents. While the numbers of ship transits and the size of vessels are certainly 
contributors to projections of the number and severity of accidents, there are many 
diverse factors which must come together to cause an individual incident. Such 
factors include, but are not limited to, human performance, mechanical operations and 
failures, and meteorological conditions. 

These projections do. however, indicate an increasing level of risk to both shippers 
and passing motorists. The costs associated with potential ship-bridge collisions is 
estimated to reach nearly $3.5 million per year by 2010 if corrective action is not 
taken.' Further, failure to remove, modify, or replace the Bridge could result in the 
need to impose operating constraints which could have substantially negative impacts 
on the competitive position and economic impact of the Port. 



I /These costs do not include a quantification of the potential loss of human 
life. 



2673 




2674 



IV. ALL HARBOR CROSSING ALTERNATIVES WHICH ELIMINATE EXISTING 
NAVIGATIONAL CONSTRAINTS ARE MORE COST-EFFECTIVE THAN 
MAINTAINING THE EXISTING BRIDGE. 

It was found that there are limited alternatives available Tor providing vehicular 
traffic access between Brunswick and areas to the southeast and southwest while 
concurrently alleviating existing harbor crossing constraints related to the Sidney 
Lanier Bridge. In addition to the status quo condition, seven harbor crossing 
alternatives were developed and analyzed. 

* Alternative I: Status Quo 

* Alternative II: Same Location - Replacement of Lift-Span On Existing 
Towers Using Existing Approaches 

* Alternative III: Same Location • Replacement of Lift-Span and Towers 
Using Existing Approaches 

* Alternative IV: Same Location - New High-Level, Fixed-Span Bridge 

* Alternative V: Upstream Location - New Lift Bridge 

* Alternative VI: Upstream Location - New Fixed Bridge 

* Alternative VII: Bridge Removal/No Replacement - Improve S.R. 303 
Bridges 

The location of these alternatives is shown in Exhibit 3. The use of a ferry service 
was also considered but found to be financially and operationally infeasible. 

Based on an analysis of the primary types of vessels calling at Brunswick, bulk 
carriers and auto ships, the present vertical clearance of the Sidney Lanier Bridge 
(139.2 feet) is the minimum height which can be considered for a replacement 
structure. Previous studies conducted for the Georgia Ports Authority indicate that 
this bridge clearance will be adequate for future dry bulk carriers and tankers which 
might utilize a new project depth well into the next century. However, in light of the 
overall growth in the size of new vessels and the ongoing trend toward 



( 



2675 




2676 



containerization of all Torins of cargo, a vertical clearance of at least 160 feet is 
preferable to accommodate a range of future vessel types. If Brunswick were to be 
developed as a container port, a bridge clearance of 1 85 feet would be needed to allow 
use of the harbor by the largest classes of container ships now in existence. As a 
result, these three vertical clearances were considered for those bridge replacement 
alternatives which would cross the main ship channel. 

The existing harbor channel immediately upstream and downstream of the Sidney 
Lanier Bridge is 400 feet wide and there are no plans for widening in the foreseeable 
future. Future channel improvements should include widening the present 200-foot 
channel under the Bridge to the overall 400-foot channel width to reduce the need for 
maneuvering in the vicinity of the Bridge. Therefore, any replacement span must 
provide for a center span clearing of 400 feet, plus an additional distance for channel 
side slopes and pier protection. Any alternative providing such clearance would allow 
future deepening of the channel to depths of up to 45 feel. The final span length 
should be determined based on a more detailed analysis of collision probabilities, pier 
protection costs, and overall project cost. 

A rigorous analysis of project costs and benefits was conducted for alternatives III, 
IV, V and VII. Alternative II was eliminated from further analysis because it does 
not allow for increased horizontal clearance and, as such, does not improve the safety 
of ship navigation or enhance the development potential of the Port. Alternative VI, 
the low-level upstream crossing was also eliminated due to its potentially negative 
impacts to upstream port activities. A summary of initial investment costs and 
measures of economic desirability is presented in Table 2. 

TAIlt 2 
COSt-CrFECtlVEIItSS ANAlftlt nWIIICS rO* NMMM atOSSINO AllEKIUTIVC* 



Htfbef CfO»»lnQ AUcrnatlvt 



Invcdnenl lentrit/Cott lltt Pretcnt 
Co»t' ll»tlo Vilut 



Interpst 

ll«ti «l Paytwcl: 

>«turn rtrlod 



III Same locitlon ■ RfpltcoKnl of lift-Span and lewtr ' tU.IH 7.8S t108.3N 2r.32X S ytari 

Using Eiliting Approaehei (18S') 

IVA Sane location - New Hlgh-l«v*l, Fixed-Span U9.2N 2.76 182. 6M 8.S7S 11 years 

t'lane Irldje (I8S') 

IVI Same location • Heu NIph-level, riied'Span US.SN (.32 *99.«H H.TiX 8 years 

2-lane Irld^e (I85'> 



2677 



IVC $H«e location • Hew Ill9h level, rUed-Spm (IW1) UJ.5H J.IS tU.in M.nX « yetri 

Oual Irldge (Phued) (IBS') (2001) MJ.2M 

IVO sane location • Hen lll»(«-lev«l, fUedSpan (1991) ««.5N 2.78 MJ.W 9.V.X 11 yeart 

Confclned Approach, Dual Irldga (Miaaed) (I8S>) (2001) tV.lM 

y Upstream location • Ken lift trldse trj.OM «.07 »16«.9H 1S.51X 8 yeari 

VII Irldje «e«>val/llo teplacerent Inwove S.«.JOJ »JO.M 6.*9 »100.JH 20. 0« « year. 

■ridgei 



hncludet eoita for cenatrtjctlon, contlngenclei, design, Clil (conatruetlon, angineerlnf and Impectlen) and denolltlon and 
reaoval. 



The evaluation matrix presented in Table 3 outlines the engineering and design 
features of each alternative. In addition, factors such as transportation service, socio- 
economic and environmental impacts were analyzed and are presented in the matrix. 
For a detailed discussion of the evaluation matrix, the reader may refer to Section 
10.3 of the Final Report. 

All alternatives evaluated were determined to be more cost-effective than maintaining 
the status quo condition. Alternative III, replacement of the lift-span and bridge 
towers, achieves the highest benefit/cost ratio and internal rate of return. It has the 
lowest initial investment cost, the shortest payback period, and the second highest net 
present value. This alternative would provide up to 18S feet of vertical clearance 
which would open the Port of Brunswick to possible future use by containerships. It 
would also provide a SOO-foot horizontal clearance, thus reducing the existing 
constraint to navigation and eliminating the structural restriction to deepening the 
harbor channel. 

Alternative VII, removal of the existing bridge with no replacement, is the second 
most cost-effective alternative. The initial investment cost for the necessary 
improvements to S.R. 303 is low and all of the indicators of economic desirability are 
very favorable. However, this alternative would result in significantly increased 
travel distances between Jekyll Island and both Brunswick and St. Simons Island. 

Construction of a new lift-span bridge upstream of Colonels Island also yields very 
favorable measures of economic desirability. In terms of cost-effec.ivencss, it is the 
third most favorable alternative. However, if the alignment crossing BIythc Island 
were selected, it would involve the generally unacceptable taking of park lands. The 
more circuitous alignment around BIythe Island would also have potentially negative 



2678 



8 " 



8 ■" 



in 



^ ! !■ ? 8 ' 



I ! » 5 - 



i 

! h 



I 1, 



!!!. 



Is is: 

1- IV 






is i« = 



11' n 






11 J , •! ^*= 



i 1 1|! 

r 



- Hi 



1 nii 

t t 1 2 : 
I 1 lU 



i i In 

i ' Hi 



hi 



I J il 



Ml 



!il 
1*1 



I n 


I h 


1 




( 




ill 

1 


i 

3 


t 




> }■- 

r ! - 
1 


s h 




11' " 



I* 



M 



■IIN -' I'i' IMJ' "i! '' 



5 I '■ 



^ ! - ' 
! ! 8 S 



! ! i || 
• * r 



f < 



11= 
11^ 



hi 



S 9 ~ 



- * 8 

" 3 * 

a 



n. n ! 



1*38 



1 • « n ' 



nil 



.1 






ji'li 



^9 



11 I f!| si 
! !' ii 



!i 



, f|!!!il Hi i 



I ( : : ! I § 
: t i i i = s 



Ifi f 



Hi 






I i 



I i U\ 

11 Pi 

II hi 

I I lil 

"I 



I I 



i I 



i I 



{ I 



! 1 



3 

i I 



II 



e 
9 


t 


s 


i ' 
i 

■ 
« 

1 ! 
I ! 


( 






» ! 


a 






11 


. 






li 


a 












i ! 


1 


: 






1 • 


1 


• 


i I 


•« 


• 


il-' 


1 i 

i 1 


5 

J 

1 


1 

i 


iij! 




i 


t 





2679 



impacts in that it would recreate a ship-bridge coMision hazard and possibly limit the 
Tuture utility of Andrews Island. 

The new, high-level, fixed-span alternatives (IV-A through IV-D) are also cost- 
effective when compared to the status quo condition. They all provide up to 185 feet 
of vertical clearance and 500 feet of horizontal clearance. However, due to higher 
initial investment costs, they are not as cost-effective as the lift-span (III and V) and 
no-bridge (VII) alternatives. These fixed-span alternatives will, however, allow both 
short- and long-term maintenance of existing traffic patterns and avoid the 
operational problems that might occur with a tift-span bridge. 

APPENDIX IV-A 

GEORGIA 
RAIL SYSTEM 
EVALUATION 

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT 

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 



Over the past several years the Georgia Department 0( Transportation, recognizing that ral freight 
transportation is a critical element in the State's multi-modal transportation system, has been evaluating 
the Georgia ral freight system. The Intent has been to determine the hiture of the ral freight network, 
what is happening to It and why, and what actions If any the State might take in formulating a ral system 
that wll serve the State's long-term economk; Interest 

The results of that multi-year study are contained In a final study report entitled Geofoia Ral System 
Evaluattoa 1989. This brief volume summarizes that eviriuatton's findir>gs. 



OVERVIEW 

The Railroad Frekiht Problem 

Whie many cargo types have diverted from ralroad use to trtjcks, ral remains ttie most effk:ient and 
essential form cH transportatkxi for many of Georgia's cargo types. As a result ral freight servfc» is 
Indispensable for some of Georgia's Industries. Unlike the highway and ab^ (altports) modes, however, ttie 



2680 



ral freight mode is owned and operated by the private sector (the railroads), and decisions concerning raR 
services are made in the private sector in accordance with the profit n'K}tive. Decisions made on this tiasis, 
fiowever, do not necessarily serve the best interests of the State's economy, since such decisions can 
adversely impact the economies of local arxl regior\al areas. 

Historically, the railroads fiave been regulated by the Georgia Public Service Commission and tfie 
Interstate Commerce Commission, and the State could effectively protest certain raBroad actions, e.g., ral 
line abarxlonments. Since 1978, however, the ability of Government to influer)ce these private sector 
decisions has eroded to the point that the regulatory process Is now largely ineffective as a rrieasure to 
preserve essential ral services. The ralroad Industry now has unparalleled freedom to mal(e economic 
decisions based on Its self-lnteresL 

This reduction in regulatory effectiver>ess has come at the same time tfut Georgia's two n^jor ralroads 
are InHiatlng extensive tracl<age restructuring efforts - InterxJed to eliminate (abandon or transfer to 
other owners) rail lines traci<age tfiat do not meet certain proTrtabflity criteria. As a result. Georgia can 
expect to lose significant segments of Its raH system over tfie r>ext lew years - unless some type of Slate 
action is fortfKoming 

This Study's Issues 

The Georgia DOrs work program examined this ral freight problem. More specMicaliy, the work sougfn to 
accomplish three things: 

1. Magnitude of the Ral AbandonmerH Problem - To evaluate all ral lines in the State to gauge the 
magnitude of thie problem - how many ral fines are in trouble, how marry might t>e lost (abandoned) by 
the year 2000, and why. 

2. Identify Unes To Be Preserved - To Identify whteh of Vhe troubled lines can and shouW be fxeserved. 

3. Cost - To gain an urxierstanding of the magnitude of the Investments tfiat woukj be needed to maintain 
the rail lines that should be preserved. 

The work program accompllsf>ed aH of tfiese objectives. The State now knows wtiteh speclfk: ral lines are 
headed in the direction of sendees reduction and abandonment, and tfie cost to t>e incuned, in both the 
sfKirt-term and long-term, to retain these servtees. Some of the lines ttiat are carxIkJates for restructuring 
are recommended for the State programs: others are nOL 

Study Findings 

The Norfolk Southern and CSX fiave Identified 15 ral lines (264 mHes of track) whk;h they desire to 
eliminate via abandonment In the near term, and another 14 ral lines (728 miles of track) whteh they hope to 
eliminate from tfieir systems by selling or leasing them to short tine railroads. In addition, this study has 
kjentifled 304 additk>nal miles tfiat will likely suffer the same abandonment fate soon. Most of these lines 
are located in rural Georgia, in places wtiere employment opportunities are already scarce and wf>ere line 
abarxJonrrients can sometintes be devastatirig to local ecorxxnles. 



2681 



In some instances the ralroads wW not directly pursue at>andonment. Rattier, the intermediate step of 
slxxt-llne ralroad operation may occur. While some short-line railroads may prove to be successful, on most 
ral lines, the lines' fundamental prot)lems wfll stHI exist so that, by the year 2000, many of the lines 
will cease to exist despite the short line ralroad intermediate step. 

The short range (5 year) adverse impacts associated \Anth the loss of rail service on the Light Density 
Unes (LDL) recommended for preservation totals $145 million (1988 dollars). This sum consists primarily of 
increased costs of transportation alternatives. 

Rail Une Expectations Through Year 2000 - The rai line analyses found that Georgia is, indeed, 
confronted with a serious rail freight line at)andonment problem. Its analyses found that: 

• 3.281 mBes (66%) of the existing 4,960 mBes of track In the State are main line or feeder line tracl<s 
that should remain viable through the year 2000. These lllceiy will not be abandonment candidates. 
State action is not expected to be needed on these raB lines. 

* 564 mBes of light density line appear to be financially viable for the operating railroad through the 
year 2000, and State action Is also not needed on these. 

• 544 mBes of light density line are In jeopardy, and State action to save these lines Is justified. 

* 571 mBes of light density line do not appear to justify State action. State action Is believed to be 
unjustified on these lines because the financial needs are so great as to be Impractical and/or the 
potential Impacts of abandonment are insufficient to warrant Govemmental action. 

Costs of Rail Une Preservation - The basic problems on the lines in which State action is justHied 
are financial In nature, and the solutions are also financlal. To rectify each line's protilems in the 
short-term, a number of actions will be necessary. In most instances, these Include investments In track and 
roadbed that wBI enable efftoient operatkxis. In other cases the recommendation is to presen/e the 
right-of- way through "raB banking,* In others consolkJatlon of two or nwre ra« lines would be prudent, and 
in others the construction of transloading facBlties is recommended. These short-term projects are 
estimated to cost $12.7 mPiion over five years (an average of $2.54 million per year), as follows: 

$ Million 



Rail Une Rehabilitation 


$10.6 


Rail Banking 


.9 


Trackage Consoiklation 


.6 


Transloading FacBlties 


•6 



Total 5-Year Need $12.7 

Recommended State Actions 

The finding of the raB study Is that the State of Georgia needs to undertake a capital investment 
program to preserve elements of the Ugtit Density Une (UDL) raB system. The recommended program consists 
of programs covering two separate time frames. The first recommended program is a five-year investment 
program intended to preserve certain services and estatjiish minimum safe operating standards. This program 



2682 



will require an average annual Investment of about $2.5 mHllon over the five-year period for a total of 
$12.7 million (1988 dollars). Beyond this period the State needs to be concemed for the long-tenn survival 
of the lines. Hence, an additional Investment over the next 15 years of $25.4 mllion (1988 dollars) is 
required. At this writing It is Impossible to predict what portion of the long-term Investment could be 
generated through the operating railroads' earned revenues. 



GEORGIA'S RAIL SYSTEM 
The Railroad Network 

Georgia's ral system Is comprised of approximately 4,960 route mles of ralroad. Two Class I ralroads 
(Norfolk Southern and CSX Transportation) own and/or operate 96 percent of the total mieage. The remaining 
four percent are operated by 12 IrxJependent short line ralroad companies. 

The State's 4.960 route mUes Includes 2.000 mles classified as light density lines" (LDi^) which 
trartsport less than 3 mllion gross ton mles per mie per year. The remaining 3.000 mles are classified as 
mainlines, and are more intensively utiized than are the U^Ls. 

Rail Une Restructuring and Abandonments 

Since 1977. Georgia's ralroads have abandorted 656 mles of ral lirte. reducing the total State ral 
system by 13 percent. Another 220 UDL mles are currerrtly shown on the ralroads' System Diagram Maps as 
potential abandonments. These past arxJ potential abandonments reflect ralroad corporate strategies to 
downsize ral networks to produce 'core systems' of high density main lines connecting major markets. 

Ibe restructurir>g or 'downsizlr>g' efforts of txith of Georgia's major ralroads will take the form of 
ettlier outright abarxionment or sale of lines to Class III 'short iirra' ralroads. Nodolk Southern has 
announced plans to sell or abandon 2,700 mles of ral line from Its 17.000 mIe Southeastern U.S. system, 
and CSX Transportatkxi (CSXT) intends to eliminate 7,000 of Hs 22.000 Southeastern U.S. system mles in the 
same manner. The sale or "spinning off of llr>es to irxJeperxJent operators is a major part of both companies' 
plans. Three of Georgia's IndeperxJent short line ralroads (Georgia Northeastern. Great Walton and Georgia 
WoodlarxJs) totaling 104 mles were recently created in this fashion from CSXT iDLs. Both carriers are now 
actively marketing fourteen LOLs in Georgia, totaling 728 mNes in length. 

The overall dosvnslzing process Is nationwide In scope and focuses on finarKiafly ntarginal lines. It 
permKs large ralroads to relieve themselves of ownership, mainter^nce and op>eratir)g costs by turning them 
over to potentially lower-cost operators whie stil partk:ipatlr>g In the traffic being generated. By 
selling some lines to short line ralroads. sendee can t>e maintained on sorT>e iir>es whk:h otherwise would 
have been abandoned. Ral users are very concemed about this process, however, because experiefx» lias found 
that the new operators do not have the capital resources of the larger carriers and thus are not as capable 
of rtding out a bad year or dealing with catastrophes such as floods, major brMge falures. or derailments. 
for example. Furthermore, the longevity of short line ralroad operation Is ur>certain. at t)est. 



2683 



CSXT has been selling its lines to new operators whie Norfolk Southern has chosen to lease Its lines to 
the new operators. The leases a^e structured so that generation of target traffic levels results in 
rent-free properties. This decreases the capital needs of new operators which helps mitigate the capital 
prot}lem mentioned earlier. In txxh cases, how^ever, the 'sfK>rt line* sale is often only an iryermediate step 
in the direction of ultimate abandonment - unless tfie ral line's furxlarr^ental problem is resolved. 
Resolution of the fundamental problem, if it is to occtjr at aN, wW likely rest with the State. 

Rail Frekiht Traffic 

Ral freigfn traffk: originating and/or terTnlnatlr>g In Georgia has remained stable over the last few 
years, at some 1.5 mllkxi cars and |ust over 100 mllkxi tons per year. This is a massive quantity of 
cargo, and is IrKllcaUve of the importance of ral transportatkxi In Georgia. 

Corrvnodlty tons by cargo type originating arxl terminating In Georgia are shown on Figure 1 . Further 
analysis irxikates ttiat coal, used primarly In the State's electric power plants, dominates (27 percerrt ol 
an originating and terminating tormage) although, for all practk:al purposes, it is only a terminating 
commodity. Lumber arxl wood products tonnage Is also important (1 7 percert), ioOowed t>y nonmelallk; minerals 
(11 percent), day, corx^ete, glass, or stone products (10 percent) and pulp, paper and {titled products (6 
percent). The top five major comnrKXJHy groups account for over 70 percent of total ral freight tonnage In 
Georgia. 

Geographk: disttibutkin of ral tonnage in Georgia by Area Planning and Development Commisskxi (APDC) 
territory is shown in Figure 2. The llustratkjn reveals that three APDCs In the rtortheast comer of the 
State are the destir^tkxts of the largest volumes of inbound traffic, followed by the Coastal APDC. Traffk: 
originatkxis are more evenly spread over the State, although somewfiat skewed toward the central and coastal 
areas. 



2684 



GEORGIA RAIL TRAFFIC 
1986 



DtSTRIBUTION 

OF 
ORIGiNATINQ 
COMMODCTES 





DISTRIBUTION 

OF 
TERMINATING 
COMMODrriES 



1986 TONNAGE 

TERHflNATINQ 0RIQINATB4Q COMMODITY 

4,279.035 1.056.360 ^^■■" Farm Products 

1.501.419 !^^mam misc. Mixed shipments 

2.790.464 1.583.020 g^>>:^-*i*i>^a Food and Kindred Products 

3.750.804 1.666.288 i^^^^^-^^^^^^^^^^^^^^--^^ Chemical and Allied Products 

5.441.909 2.587.104 \ ■■■>:■■■■■ -r-y.- -a AB Other Commodities 

5.422.804 4.342.176 I 1 Non-metalBc Minerals 

2.337.200 4.348.280 l/Wvl Pulp . Paper and Allied Product 

4.121.668 6.130.880 t \ \ M Stone . Clay . and Glass Products 

7.111.552 8.455.912 i I Lumber and Wood Products 

24.644,318 y/////A Coal 



Figure 1 



2685 




2686 



Wtthin the 100 mRlion tons of annual ral traffic is some 15 million tons of intrastate traffic 
(carload Jngs witfi both origination and destir\ation within tfie State, counted as 15 million originating plus 
15 milion terminating). The remaining 70 milion tons monies between Georgia and other states. Approximately 
20 million tons ntove from Georgia to ottier parts of the country while 50 million tons are shipped Into 
Georgia. Georgia Interstate traffic flc^vs are virtually proportional to the distance to or from Georgia, 
with the nru|ority of the traffic flowing t>etween Georgia and other southeastern and middle Atlantic states. 
Another category of traffic maldng use al the Georgia ral system is traffic (54 million tons annually) which 
moves through Georgia with neither an origin nor a destination within the State. Such "through" movements 
are Important to the railroads but are o* lide or no ecorromic value to the Georgia ecorximy. 

A forecast of Georgia ral traffic tonnage was made to the year 2000. The forecast Indicates a 27 
percent Increase In tonnage (an average growth rate of less ttian 2 percent per year)- Given this minor 
increase. It Is nrrast unllkeiy that traffic growth wff be sufficient to resolve the State's LDL 
abarxlonment/restructuring problem. 



RAIL SYSTEM ANALYSES 

The Georgia Ral System Evaluation study suggests that the ral main lines and feeder lines are 
sufficiently well used as to be ftnancially self-sustaining. As a result the study focused on the light 
density rail lines (IDI^). Tf>e prirx:lpaJ ot^jectlve of tfie LOL examination was to determine which lines are 
ecorxxnically viable, and wtiich are most likely to ktecome abarxlorvnent or sales candklates. 

Utilization of Rait Unes 

The use (traffk; toniwge density) o( each Georgia ral line Is shown on Figure 3. The map Wentifies the 
LDls and the mainlines using the commonly accepted criterion of 3 mllkxi gross ton mies per mie per year 
(the thki dashed lines on Figure 3). The ral system's traffk: densities are classified as follows. 

GEORGIA RAIL SYSTEIM UNE DENSITY CLASSIFICATIONS 

1987 

UGHT DENSITY 
RAILROAD MAINUNE UNE TOTAL 



-(miles)- 



Southem Railway 1,357 1,113 2.470 

CSX Transportatkjn 1.614 657 2.271 

Local Independents 25 191 216 

TOTAL TRACK MILES 2,996 1,961 4.957 

PERCENT 60 40 too 



2687 



rcKKtssct 



I NOffTH cmoim* 



pPte^i^^ 



UOTU/U 
10 TO 9.0 HOTU/M 
LESS THAN 3.0 UOTU/M 




r leu I e t 



SOUnCE: 

cs«r. sou. Aii4 o* oor 



1989 RAIL LINE DENSITIES 



2688 



Nearly 180,000 ral cars are loaded on LOL tracks annually; LDL carloadlngs consthute approximately 1 1 % 
of Statewide annual carloadlngs. The State's LOLs comprise 40 percent of total route mileage and originate 
or terminate 1 1 percent of total carloads. This disparity In use is the reason that the railroads are eager 
to reduce LDL mileage In the State (and the nation). The major LOL commodities, In comparison to overall 
State rail system commodtties, differ little with two exceptions - farm products, which were absent in the 
top commodities Statewide, are ma|or LOL commodities, and coal Is not a LOL top comrrradlty. The forecast for 
Georgia agriculture Is uncertain, and the overall LOL tonnage forecast Is Dat (not increasing or 
decreasing). 

Rail Line Financial Analyses 

In the study tfie State's 1,961 mie LOL ral system was segmerrted arx), after initial screening, 15 CSXT, 
29 SOU, arxj 3 hxlependent line segments totallrtg over 1,900 mUes were identified for detailed analysis. Tfie 
LOLs were then analyzed in accordance with tfvee criteria. 

1. Ral Line Profit or Loss - Ralroad reverujes and costs were calculated for each LDL, to determine the 
finarKlal viability of the line's operation. 

2. Ral Une CorxJItlon - Each line was Inspected, deficiencies rK>ted, and Investments estimated tfiat 
would be needed to keep tfie line at standard and operating efftoiently. 

3. Abandonment Impacts - Tfie costs of alternative iransportatkKi were estimated, to see if the impacts 
of at>andonment are greater than, or less tfian, any financial assistarKe tfiat might be necessary to 
keep tfie line open. 

Conclusions drawn from the results of Ifie analyses were tempered with future plans ot)tained from the 
railroads. The analyses results were tfien used to place tfie ral lines Into three categories - 1) 
financially viable. 2) borderline, and 3) nonviable. The Viable' category contains the mainline core 
system, secondary mainlines, and tfiose portkMis of the LOL universe determined from tfie analyses to be 
profitable operattons. The 'borderline' cateoorv comprises those lines which are neither dearly profitable 
nor deatfy unprofitable . Reasonable alteratkxis of eKher revenues or costs through increased traffte 
volumes or financial assistance would elevate the borderline lines to the viable category. The borderline 
lines are also the most likely to tiecome short line candkJates. Tfie 'nonviaWe" category contains those 
lines estimated to be unprofitable now and in the future. Hence, the nonviable category has not been 
included in tfie recommended program. 

The LDL lines estimated to be eaming suffk;lent revenue to cover ail costs, induding long4erm 
rehabilitation needs, were eiminated from further evaluatkxi. The remaining 21 percent of the State rail 
system falling Into the borderline or unprofitat)le categories were subjected to additional analysis to 
determine if tfie public adverse economk; Impacts which would result from tfieir abandonment would justify 
public Investment for service preservatkHi. Tfie premise Is that ral service preservation is warranted in 
Instances wtiere tfie costs of owning, maintaining and operating a ral line are less tfian the costs to local 
economies whk:h would be imposed by abandonment of tfie same line. 



2689 



Year 2000 Rail System 

The results of the analyses were used to forecast the year 2000 ral system. The year 2000 system Is 
comprised of the core mainline systern, secondary mainlines, feeder lines, and selected light density lines. 
The latter are those LDLs which are estimated to be profltatile operations, plus those borderline cases 
warranting assistance and which would be viable given some type of assistance. In all, the Georgia ral 
system is forecast to comprise 4,389 mRes in the year 2000 (down from 4,957 mNes In 1987) as set forth 
below and delineated on Rgure 4. 



YEAR 2000 RAIL SYSTEM 



CATEGORY 



Core Mainline 

Secondary Main arxj Feeder 

ProfKable Light DensKy Line 

Light Density Lines Requiring AssistarKe 

TOTAL SYSTEM MILES 



ROUTE 
MILEAGE 

2,357 
924 
564 
544 



4,389 



RAIL PROGRAM NEEDS 

Based on the profitability, raR line corxiltlon, and ecorK>mlc Impact of abarxlonment calculations, the 
study assessed the financial Investments that would be needed on each raH line if such funds were 
available. The financial Investments were estimated by year, over a five-year time period. In each case a 
most likely course ol action was Identified, Including: 

* RaH Ur>e Ref»bllltation - spend money to upgrade the raH line to enable more efficient operation 
and/or to keep it from deteriorating further. 

* Ral Banking - accept that raH service on a line may have to be discontinued, but protect the 
right-of-way via "ral banking." 

* Ral ConsdWation - resolve tf>e line's protjiems by provWing a new connection track or other forms of 
trackage consolidation. 

* Construct Transloading FaclHles - accept that a ral line wBI be abandoned, and mitigate the adverse 
Impacts of abandonment by constructing facilities to improve the interlace with other transportation 
modes. 

Rail Une Rehabilitation 



When lines become marginal or unprofitable, maintenance usually bears the brunt of ralroad 
cost-reductkxi efforts and, over a period of time, line condrttons deteriorate to the oolnt that a major 
Investment Is required to maintain operattons. At that point, the ralroad typteally seeks to justify 



2690 



abandonment. Financial assistance to cocrect deferred maintenance or to rehal>litate a line has t)een the 
method selected by most states to retain LOL ral services. RehaMltatlon projects yield Improved track 
condKions which In turn lead to Improved operations, safety and service. 

Track reiiatilltatkKi for this study was estimated consMering both short- and long-term rteeds. Work 
required within five years was classified as short4erm, and those needs whk:h could t>e delayed t>eyorx) that 
point were classified as long term. Short-term rehabilitatksn needs total $10.6 mRlion, txjt an additkxuil 
$25.4 mHlkjn wW be needed to completely satisfy the long-term needs tjeyorxJ the initial period. The $25.4 
mBkxi kxig-term need wouW not necessarily have to come from the State, although that optton siiould not be 
entirely discarded. 



In consMeratkxi of needs for funding purposes, the short-term approach was used. This approach buys 
time to provkje an operator the opportunity to increase traffk:, and thus Improve profitabHtty, to a level 
that ior>g-term needs can be satisfied from ralroad operatkxw wirtthout further Governmental assistance. The 
projects listed t)elow fulfill that purpose. The LDL lines are all segments in the "borderiine' category, and 
all have rehablitatk>n needs. All segments also satisfy the benefit-cost criteria or involve a special set 
of cIrcufTWtances. 

UDL REHABIUTAT10N PROJECT NEEDS 



UNE SEGMENT 


LENGTH 




YEAR 








tifi. 


Terminal Polnit 


1 


2 


3 


4 


5 


TOTA15 






(miles) 






($000) 








C-1 


Cordele - RandaH 


62.5 


$643.9 


$643.9 








$1,287.8 


C-2A 


Columbus - Rteiiland 


386 


402.0 


402.1 








804.1 


C-2B 


Balntxkjge - Damascus 


294 


306.0 


306.5 








612.5 


C-6 


Waycross • Pearson 


30.5 






$319.0 


$320.0 




639.0 


C-11A 


VMalla - Helena 


355 


.T62.0 


363.0 








725.0 


C-11B 


Cordele - Rochelle 


19.8 


202.2 


202.2 








404.4 


C-15&16 


GA/TN Stale Une - Blue 
RWge and Murphy JcL - 


















Mineral Bluff 


16.5 






163.0 


183.8 




366.8 


S-6 


VaMosta - Douglas 


63.0 










$469.9 


469.9 


S-7 


GA/TN Slate Ur>e - Hedges 


17.9 


179.0 


179.3 








358.3 


S-8 


GA/TN Stale Line - Lyerly 


47.6 








506.5 


506.5 


1,013.0 


S-12 


Machen - Covington 


25.2 








257.8 


257.8 


515.6 


S-16 


Dover - Metier 


28.9 








288.7 


288.7 


577.4 


S21 


Fort Vaney- Perry 


12.9 






145.9 


145.9 




291.8 


S-22 


Fort Valley -Roflo Sand Pit 


9.0 


93.0 


93.0 








186.0 


S-32 


Harilee Jet. - Eatonton 


13.0 








139.2 


139.2 


278.4 


GRWR 


Sodal Circle - Monroe 


10.0 


169.8 


169.8 








339.6 


GNRR 


ElUabeth - EHljay 


666 


724.0 


724.1 








1,448.1 


GWRC 


Bamett - Washlrigton 


17,4 








127.9 


127.9 


255.8 



TOTALS 



544J $3,081.9 $3,083.9 $647.9 $1,969.8 $1,790.0 $10,573.5 



Rail Une Banking 



There are cases where contkwed ral servtee Is not presently justified, but there is reason to believe 
the preservatkx) al a line and Its right-of-way lor future use Is an appropriate actkxi. Two such projects 
are listed below. One, to preserve a corridor for access wtiere the only other connectktn is believed to be 
in danger, and the otiier for ecorKKnk: development reasons. 



2691 



LDL RAIL BANK NEEDS 



LINE SEGMENT 



No. Terminal Points 



C-4B Albany - Sylvester 

C-14 Blue Ridge - Ellijay 

TOTALS 



31.7 



YEAR 



LENGTH 


1 


(miles) 


($0 


18 4 


$706.5 


19.9 


195.0 



$901.5 



2-S 



$0 



TOTALS 



$706.5 
195.0 

$901.5 



Ball ConsoHdallon 

Sometimes service can be maintained to portions o* an LDL by corKtriKting or Improving a connection track 
to another ran line, e.g., service Is retained to statkins (shippers) on nonviable lines from viable lines 
of another raNroad. Timing for implementation of these projects Is approximated because actual need is 
dependert upon abandonment applbatlons by the ralroads arvj approval by the Interstate Commerce Commissioa 

LDL RAIL CONSOUDATION NEEDS 



LINEI 


SEGMENT 
Terminal Points 




YEAR 






No. 


LOCATION 1 


2 


? 


4 5 


TOTALS 










($000) 






C-4A 


Albany - Dawson 


Dawson 


$150.0 






$150.0 


S-11 


Royston - Elberton 


Bberton 


$150.0 






150.0 


S-27 


Griffin - Yates 


Newnan 






$150.0 


150.0 






Senoia 




$ 150.0 




150.0 



TOTALS 



$0 $300.0 $150.0 $150.0 



$0 



$600.0 



Abandonment Impact MHkiatlon rrransloadlrw Facilities) 

When malntainarKe of direct ral service fails, assistance could be used to provkJe alternative means of 
transport In a manner less expensive than continuing direct rail servk;e. Such assistance includes the 
acquisttion, construction and Improvement of facflities for the proviskm of substitute freight servtee such 
as the transloading facilities listed below. Again, as in the case of consolidations, project timing is 
approximated. 



TRANSLOADING FACIUTIES NEEDS 





UNE SEGMENT 


LOCATION 




YEAR 






Na 


Terminal Points 


1 


2 3 4 

($000) 


5 


TOTALS 


C-2 

04 

C-5 

S^ 

S-17 

S-20 


Rtehland - Damascus 
Dawson - Sylvester 
Dillon - Kingwood 
Moullie - Pavo 
Ardmore - Sylvania 
Cochran - Hawkinsville 


Arlington 
Albany 

Moultrie 

Rocky Ford 
Cochran 


$125.0 


$125.0 

$125.0 
125.0 


$125.0 


$125.0 
125.0 

125.0 

125.0 
125.0 



TOTALS 



$125.0 $125.0 $250.0 



$0 $125.0 



$625.0 



2692 



Five Year Fymlina Summary 

Total ral assistance needs of $12.7 million for the next five years iiave been itemized in xbe preceding 
discussion and are summaitzed below. ExpendKures vary by year based on anticipated timing of needs. Annual 
funding requirements range from a low of $1.1 mWion to a tiigfi of $4.1 mliion. Expenditure of tfie $12.7 
mllion would be made in an attempt to prevent $145 mliion in adverse public impacts associated with line 
abandonments. 



LOL RAIL NEEDS SUMMARY 



P RW^CTTYP g 



Rehabilitation 

RailBanic 

Consolidation 

Transloading 

Faclity 

TOTALS 



125.0 



YEAR 



($000) 



125.0 250.0 



125.0 



TOTALS 



$3,081.9 $3,083.9 $647.9 $1,969.6 $1,790.0 $10,573.5 

901.5 901.5 

300.0 150.0 150.0 600.0 



625.0 



$4,108.4 $3,508.9 $1,047.0 $2,119.8 $1,915.0 $12,700.0 



Rail Line Acquisition ' 

The acquisition of selected ral lines wll assure the long-term preservation of the essential rail 
system for the State and the continuation of vital transportation services to Georgia communKies. The 
acqulshion of select ral lines is further needed to assure the vitality of light density ral line 
operations and to protect the required public investment in these faclities. 



LOL ACQUISITION PROJECT NEEDS 



UNE SEGMENT 
No. Terminal Points 

C-1 Cordele - Randall 

C-2A Columbus - Richland 

C-2B Bainbrldge - Damascus 

C-6 Waycross - Pearson 

C-11A Vidalia - Helena . 

C-1 IB Cordele - Rochelie 

C-1 4 Blue Ridge - Enijay 

C-1 5 GA/TN Line - Blue RUge 
& & Murphy Jet. - 

C-1 6 Mineral Bluff 

C-1 9 Rockmart - Edna (added) 

S-6 Valdosta - Douglas 

S-7 GA/TN Une - Hedges 

S-6 GA/TN Une - Lyerly 

S-12 Machen - Covington 

S-16 Dover - Metier 

S-21 Fort Valley - Perry 



YEAR 



LENGTH 1 


? 


? 


4 


9 


T0TAU5 


(miles) 






($000) 








62.5 










$3,225.5 


$3,225.5 


38.6 










2.324.1 


2,324.1 


29.4 








$1,770.2 




1,770.2 


30.5 


$1,783.5 










1,783.5 


35.S 








1.456.8 




1,456.8 


19.8 








812.5 




812.S 


13 3 


(funded 1 


=Yaoi 












'""/ 










16.5 




$678.6 








678.6 


36.5 


7.100.0 










7,100.0 


63.0 


1.555.5 










1,555.5 


17.9 






$841.5 






841.5 


47.6 






2.452.8 






2,452.8 


25.2 




948.5 








948.5 


28.9 






1.271.8 






1,271.8 


12.9 


497.5 










497.5 



2693 



S-22 Fort Valley - Rollo 


9.0 


185.9 


185.9 


S-28 Rover - Meyer (added) 


67.0 


1.000.0 


1,000.0 


S-32 Harlee Jet. - Eatonton 


13.0 


590.3 


590.3 


S-33 Atlanta - Macon (added) 


103.0 


(appraisal in progress) 





GRWR Social Cirde - Monroe 


10.0 


112.0 


112.0 


GNRR Elizabeth - Ellijay 


66.6 


2,318.0 


2.318.0 


GWRC Bamett - Washington 


17.4 


990.2 


990.2 


HRT Bowersville - Hartwell 


9.6 


181.0 


181.0 


(added) 









TOTALS 



773.7 $12,117.5 $5,047.3 $4,752.0 $4,629.8 $5,549.6 $32,096.2 



Total Fundlfw Summary 

The preceding five-year Funding Summary Itemized elements of the State Light Density Line (LDL) rail 
i>eeds. Summarized below Is the precedir>g rteeds plus acquisition costs. As r>oted on the preceding page. 
State acquisition represents the best assurarx^ o( future service needs and the continuity of the essential 
State raB system. 



TOTAL LOL RAIL NEEDS SUMMARY 



YEAR 



PROJECT TYPE 


1 


2 


3 


4 


5 


TOTALS 






($000) 






Rehabilitation 


$3,081.9 


$3,083.9 


$647.9 


$1,969.8 


$1,790.0 


$10,573.5 


RaH Bank 


901.5 










901.5 


Consolidation 




300.0 


150.0 


150.0 




600.0 


Transloading 














FacBity 


125.0 


125.0 


250.0 




125.0 


625.0 


Acquisition 


12.117.5 


5,047.9 


4.752.0 


4.629.8 


5.549.6 


32.096.2 



TOTALS 



$16,225.9 $8,556.2 $5,799.9 $6,749.6 $7,464.6 $44,796.2 



2694 



■ CW«W»»«t»J>. ** >!**! — . 



LEQENO: 



— com MAIN UNI 

HCONOARY MAIN ON FCCOIH IINC 

llOMt OENSITV tmi WITHOUT 

AttltTANCE 

^ IIOMT DCNSITY IINC WITH 
AdIITANCC 




GEORGIA RAIL SYSTEM 
YEAR 2000 FORECAST 



2695 



LETTER FROM ZELL MILLER, GOVERNOR, STATE OF GEORGIA 



Congressman Bob Carr 

Chairman 

Committee on Appropriations 

Subcommittee on Transportation and Related Agencies 
United States House of Representatives 
Washington. DC 205 1 5 May 11.1 993 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

The Atlanta MulU-Modal Passenger Terminal Is one of our highest 
transportation priorities within the state of Georgia. With the potential to service In 
excess of 5.5 million passengers annually, resulting In a $400 million economic 
impact for the state, the implementation of this facility will enrich the lives of 
Individuals throughout the southeast. Georgia Is prepared to obligate matching funds 
for this project, and the Department of Transportation, with local participation, is 
initiating design and engineering for the terminal site. The total cost of (he Atlanta 
terminal is esUmated at $125,000,000. We are requesUng $100,000,000 in federal 
assistance to complete this project in time for the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta. 

Of particular Importance is the terminal's potential to bring together many 
diverse forms of transportation under one roof in order to encourage the 
environmentally sound practice of public transportation use. While Georgia's current 
infrastructure is an ambitious and far-reaching system of highways, rail, airports, 
bridges, and ports, we In Georgia embrace the visionary goals of intermodallsm set 
forth In the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efilclency Act of 1991 . We hope the 
Atlanta MulU-Modal Passenger Terminal will be given serious consideration by the 
Appropriations Committee as a model of this new vision. 

I appreciate your past assistance and look forward to the successful completion 
of this worthwhile project 

Sincerely, 




2696 



LETTER FROM PffiRRE HOWARD, LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, STATE 

OF GEORIGA 

May 12, 1993 
Honorable William H. Natcher 

United States Congressman 

Chairman, Appropriations Committee 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Natchen 

Please accept this letter in support of die Atlanta Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal. I join 
with many other state and federal o^icials in Georgia in expressing my sincere desire to see this 
valuable project move forward. 

Consistent with Congressional priorities outlined in the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
Efficiency Act of 1991, the Atlanta Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal facility will integrate bus, 
commuter rail and the intrastate rail system, expanding access to regional airports, businesses, 
sports facilities and downtown cultural events. Furthermore, the proposed Atlanta terminal 
facility will serve as a visible symbol to the world during the 1996 Summer Olympics of our 
state and our country's commitment to continued investment in infrastructure and continued 
concern about our enviionmenL 

As you know, rail transportation has played a vital role in the economic growth of the 
Atlanta regional area. With over 5,000 miles of rail in Georgia, our state and region's economic 
and social progress depend heavily on the continuation and expansion of these valuable rail 
facilities. 

Thank you for your consideration of this project and for all you do to set much needed 
priorities in the federal budget 

Sincerely, 




2697 



LETTER FROM MAYNARD JACKSON, MAYOR, ATLANTA, GA 



Th« Honorable Bob Carr 
Transportation Subcomioittee 
Hous* Appropriations Coiunitte^ 
2347 Rayburn House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 

Dear Congressnan Carr: 



May 3, 1993 



Z urge you to support federal 
Passenger Teminal, a project 
objectives of the Intemodal S 
Act of 1991 and the Clean Air ; 
the 1996 Centennial Olympic Ga 
focus, international attention 
environaental policy in the un 



funding for the Atlanta Multinodal 
:hat is vital to meeting the 
irface Transportation Efficiency 
^ct Aaendaents of 1990. As host of 
DOS, Atlanta will use this project to 
)n the new age of transportation and 
Lted States. 



The Atlanta Multinodal Passengor 
objectives of ISTEA by providing 
various surface transportation ~ 
link in a seaaless passenger ^ 
served include passenger rail 
rail with a direct connection 
Five Points Station), intercity 
pedestrian activity, through <S^ 
pedestrian systea to aajor act 



to 



The terminal will also provide 
functions, including passenger 
which will expedite the transf 
aviation aotivity at Hartsfiel 
the future national rail pass- 
also serve as the site for a 
among these transportation mod 
environmentally sound alternat 



Terminal will support the major 
for development and interface of 
modes and by providing the critical 
transportation network. Modes to be 
AMTRAK, oonnuter rail, and MARTA 
the regional system hub at the 
buses, taxicabs, rental cars, and 
ti^eation of Important new links in the 
vlty centers. 



for landside commercial aviation 

ticketing and baggage check-in, 

r between international and national 

Atlanta Xnternational Airport and 
ger system. The terminal will 
wntown heliport. The interaction 
>s will promote economically and 
ves to the automobile. 



Atlanta, with its excellent international aviation gateway and 
rail infrastructure, offers a unique opportunity to develop a 
true national intermodal hub. | Furthermore, the 1996 Olympics 
affords us an extraordinary opportunity and challenge to 
demonstrate national advances 1^ passenger transportation to 
the rest of the world. We ask you to support us in meeting that 
challenge. 




2698 



LETTER FROM GERALD L. BARTELS, PRESIDENT, ATLANTA 
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 



The Honorable Bob Carr 
United States House of Representatives 
2347 Rayburn House Office Building 
Washington, D.C 20515-0008 

Dear Representative Can: 



May 3. 1993 



This letter is directed to you as a true friend 
personal mobility in our state and throughout 



Iqng 



The Atlanta business conununlty has been a 
of the Multi-Modal Terminal In fact, proposals 
Commerce passenger rail symposium m 1990. 
to substantially expand an FTA feasibility stud f 



of Georgia and as a leading benefactor of product and 
the nation. Through your subcommittee, Congress has 

funded MARTA, highway projects and transf] ortation management systems that were Instrumental in 

bringing the Centennial Olympics to Atlanta ii i 1996. Today, we would like to thank you for your past 

that will demonstrate how the intermodal linkage of these 

diverse transportation systems can maximize eS ciency of travel for the Centeimial Olympics. That project 

is the Atlanta Multi-Modal Passenger Termini 1. 



time advocate of balanced transportation systems and 
for the facility were bom at an Atlanta Chamber of 
$ ibsequently, the private sector contributed in-kind services 
for the project that was completed in 1992. 



The business sector supports development of (he Multi-Modal Terminal for solid, bottom-line reasons. 
First, using passenger rail systems linked to MARTA, other surface modes, and Mansfield Atlanta 
International Airport can signlGcantly reduce tl e traffic congestion and air pollution that, if unaddressed, 
could limit our region's future growth. Secoid, the terminal will maximize the uttUzation of existing 
infrastructure, both in the transportation secto ', as well as through expected redevelopment around the 
central city project site. Third, development of t tie terminal, complemented by the model MARTA system. 
Hartsfleld Airport, and Georgia's Interstate H ghway system, will demonstrate conclusively that Atlanta 
and the United States remain at the forefironc pf innovative transporution. 



Atlanta and Georgia have clearly beneQttei 
community has used that advantage to create 
you and your colleagues on the House Transj 
the chance to demonstrate that 'Atlanta Mai 



Sincerely^ 



through the federal transportation pipeline, and our 
national model for Sunbelt development. We hope that 
^nation Appropriations Subcommittee will, again, give us 
as America moves toward a Multi-Modal future. 



Gef^ld L. Bartets, CCE 
P(^ident 




I 



2699 



STATEMENT OF THE ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF 
TRANSPORTATION 



Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee 

It Is a pleasure to be able to submit testimony on behalf of the 
Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) before the Transportation 
and Related Agencies Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations 
Committee. At this time. I would like to thank Chairman Lautenberg 
and the members of the Committee for their past support for Illinois' 
transportation program. 

I would also like to thank Chairman Lautenberg and other members of 
the Committee for holding these Important hearings today on 
transportation funding for FY 1994. I am Indeed grateful for this 
opportunity to share with you some of Illinois' transportation funding 
concerns. 

Illinois has a number of Important Interests concerning FY 1994 US DOT 
appropriations legislation. They are as follows: 



Bus Capita l Earmarks 

Illinois and the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) jointly request 
$67 million In Section 3 bus capital funds for the CTA and nine 
downstate transit providers. This joint request Is a demonstration of 
our mutual Interest 1n securing funding for bus capital needs. 

The CTA Is requesting $32 million for a Bus Service Management 
System. This system uses radio equipment to transmit Information from 
the centrally located control center to eight bus garages and over 



2700 



2,000 buses. This system will significantly Improve both the 
performance and cost effectiveness of the CTA bus network. The state, 
on behalf of the downstate transit providers. Is requesting 
$35 million to comply with federal mandates under the Americans with 
Disabilities Act, construct or upgrade Important support facilities 
and replace over-age vehicles. 

A demonstration project Is currently underway In Champaign, Illinois 
In which a new bus body Is fitted with the engine, axles, seating and 
other parts from an old bus. This process results In a bus with the 
useful life of a new bus at two-thirds the cost of a new bus. The 
Initial rehabilitated bus will be complete this summer and a one-year 
operational test will begin. 

Illinois also conducted a study In 1991 that looked at the cost 
effectiveness of bus rehabilitation In Illinois. That study concluded 
that excessive corrosion of the structural framework resulting from 
Illinois' weather makes rehabilitation financially unfeasible. It Is 
hoped that the rehabilitated demonstration buses will address that 
problem. 

Central Area Circulator 

Illinois supports the city of Chicago's request for $70 million In 
FY 1994 from the Section 3 new start program to continue project 
engineering for the Central Area Circulator (CAC), a light rail 
transit line to serve Chicago's downtown Loop area. The project has 
received $59.3 million through FY 1993 from Section 3 discretionary 
mass transit funds. Funds have been used for planning, alternatives 
analysis and environmental work. Preliminary engineering and design 
work Is also underway. 



2701 



This project has strong backing from businesses In the area who have 
pledged to fund one-third of the cost through a special local tax 
assessment on non-residential property. The state has reserved 
$20 million to fund Its one-third share of the planning and design 
work on the project with the remainder coming from federal funds. 



Wisconsin C entral Commuter Rail Service 

Illinois supports Hetra's request for $20.6 million for the new 
Wisconsin Central Commuter Rail Service. This line will provide 
service between northwestern Lake County and western Cook County and 
downtown Chicago and Includes a connection to G'Hare Airport. Initial 
plans call for three rush-hour trains In each direction, plus four 

trains In the off-peak periods. Higher level service will be added as 
demand Increases. There Is strong local commitment for the Wisconsin 
Central line and communities along the line have agreed to fund 
station and parking lot development. 

This project also has strong regional support. The regional MPO, the 
Chicago Area Transportation Study, has endorsed a multi-year 
allocation of $21.6 million In CHAQ funds for this project. In 
addition, Illinois will be providing approximately $6 million In state 
matching funds. With this local, regional and state support. Section 
3 discretionary funds will be needed for only 39 percent of the total 
project cost. Illinois supports adequate federal funding to keep this 
project on schedule toward Implementation. 



2702 

ADVANCE Intelligent Vehicle-Hlahwav System Demonstratio n Program 

Illinois requests $6 million In FY 1994 for the ADVANCE IVHS 
demonstration project. This project received $4.5 million In FY 1993. 

The Illinois Department of Transportation In cooperation with the 
Federal Highway Administration. Motorola and the Illinois Universities 
Research Consortium Is undertaking a large-scale field demonstration 
to test and evaluate an IVHS concept. This large scale IVHS 
demonstration project Is to be located In the northwest suburbs of 
Chicago, a rapidly developing area with a large population and 
employment base and an extensive arterial street network. Funding to 
maintain full progress on this project should be provided. 

Garv-Chlcago -Hllwaukee IVHS Corridor 

Illinois requests $2.5 million in FY 1994 for IVHS projects on the 
Illinois portion of the Gary-Chicago-Milwaukee corridor. The ISTEA 
authorized the designation of three to ten priority IVHS corridors. 
The corridor extending from Gary, IN through Chicago, IL to 
Milwaukee, MI is one of four such corridors designated so far. In 
FY 1993, funding to this corridor Included $500,000 for Illinois, 
$1.4 million for Indiana, and $500,000 for Mlsconsin. 

In Illinois, this corridor project includes the Transportation 
Information Expansion and Unification Program (TIEUP). This program 
calls for the development of transportation Information that can be 
directly used by cable television. Some of the information will be 
area specific and displayed on terminals at various locations along 
the corridor to provide real time traffic information. 



2703 



Additional funds In FY 94 will be used to upgrade conmuni cations 
capabilities through a basic fiber optics system on Chicago area 
expressways, expand the current traffic monitoring system and further 
develop projects for the TIEUP program. 

Environmental Impact Statement a nd Design Work for the 
Chlcaao-St. Louis High Speed Rail Corridor 

Illinois requests $2.5 million for FY 1994 to begin the design work 
for grade crossing Improvements and the Environmental Impact Statement 
(EIS) for the Chlcago-St. Louis high speed rail corridor. This Is an 
Ideal time to begin this work, since the feasibility study that Is now 
underway will be completed In the spring of 1993. 

Design work for grade crossing Improvements must begin soon If the 
high speed rail service project Is to proceed on schedule. 
Comprehensive plans detailing existing conditions and proposed 
Improvements are required for all crossings affected by speeds over 
80 mph to 125 mph. For the Chlcago-St. Louis corridor this 
necessitates detailed engineering work on 9 grade separations, 
120 four-quadrant gate Installations and 60 road extensions associated 
with crossing closures. 

The EIS win review the effect of air pollution, air and highway 
congestion, accidents and energy usage. In addition, noise, 
vibration, locomotive emissions, land use and any other areas that 
could negatively Impact the environment will be analyzed. Impacts 
win be carefully assessed and compared to existing and projected 
Impacts of current transportation modes. It Is anticipated that using 
existing tracks and right-of-way will minimize any negative Impacts. 



2704 



As the design work on the grade crossings progresses, the Impacts from 
the crossing Improvements will also be analyzed. 



Highway Obligation Celling 

Illinois urges the subcommittee to approve a highway obligation 
celling as close as possible to the $18.36 billion authorized under 
the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). 
An obligation celling at the authorized level In FY 1994 Is needed to 
enable states to fully utilize the Increased federal support provided 
by Congress In the ISTEA. In addition, the oblljiatlon celling should 
only cover programs as designated In the ISTEA and not minimum 
allocation and demonstration projects. 

Due to restrictive obligation ceilings In past years. Illinois alone 
has accumulated approximately $190 million In highway funds that 
cannot be obligated for projects. 



Section 9 T ransit Formula Funds 

Illinois supports funding for the mass transit formula program 
(Section 9) as close as possible to the $2.6 billion level authorized 
In the ISTEA. In addition, operating assistance to all urbanized 
areas should be continued. 

The transit formula funding program (Section 9) provides funds for 
routine capital needs. All transit systems are now facing Increased 
capital funding needs. The Americans with Disabilities Act contains 
direct mandates to acquire accessible rolling stock, modify facilities 
and provide paratransit service. In addition, the Clean Air Act 



2705 



contains direct mandates for less polluting engines. Unless 
additional funding Is made available for these new needs, the existing 
capital programs will face a serious funding shortfall beyond what Is 
already being experienced. 

State and local governments have Increasingly shouldered the burden of 
the decline In federal funding for transit. However, these state and 
local efforts have limits and cannot Indefinitely expand to substitute 
for the continued retreat of federal funding, especially In light of 
the new Increased needs following the federal legislation on 
accessibility and clean air. 

Adequate funding for the transit formula program Is essential for the 
smaller urbanized area transit systems In Illinois as well as our 
larger systems. These smaller systems have very limited local revenue 
sources. In fact, the drop In federal formula funding over the last 
eight years has forced these systems to cut back on needed bus 
replacement and other essential capital Improvements to critical 
levels In some cases. 

Federal operating assistance through this program Is an essential 
source of funding for transit service In Illinois cities. Annual 
federal operating assistance to the Regional Transportation Authority 
averages approximately $50 million, and St. Louis Bl-State receives 
about $10 million. 



Section 18 Rural Transit 

Illinois supports funding for rural transit at the full ISTEA 
authorized level of $154 million for FY 1994. Although this Is a 
relatively small amount compared to transit funding for urbanized 



2706 



areas. It is critical to meeting mobility needs In the nation's small 
cities and rural areas. The needs In these areas are growing; yet, 
their local revenue sources continue to be very limited. The large 
reduction In federal funding for FY 1993 ($16.7 million less than 
FY 1992) has caused hardships for this underfunded and underserved 
constituency. 

Amtrak and Local Rail Freight Assistance 

Illinois requests an appropriation as close as possible to the FY 1994 
authorized level of $631 million for Amtrak and at least at the 
FY 1993 funding level of $8 million for Local Rail Freight Assistance. 
Amtrak service Is a key element of our national transportation 
system. Amtrak operates a total of 40 Individual trains throughout 
Illinois as part of the nation's passenger rail system. Amtrak serves 
approximately three million passengers annually, and partially 
subsidizes an additional 16 state-sponsored 403(b) trains In 
intrastate service In four separate corridors: Chicago-Champaign, 
Chicago-Springfield, Chlcago-Qulncy and Chicago-Milwaukee. 

The Local Rail Freight Assistance Program provides funding to states 
for rail capital rehabilitation and Improvements to assist with the 
continuation of essential rail freight service on light density 
lines. IDOT has 15 project requests totaling $12 million to retain or 
upgrade service on light density lines. 

Section 402 Safety Grants - Section 410 Alcohol Impair ed Driving 
Incentive Grant Program 

Illinois supports Section 402 program funding as close as possible to 
the authorized ISTEA level of $171 million. The Section 402 program 



2707 



provides grants to states for a variety of safety related programs. 
Beginning In FY 1993. funds made available for the Section 402 Safety 
Grants are to be available for specific programs such as alcohol 
Incentive grants and motorcycle helmet and safety belt use law 
grants. Since some of these programs are authorized as takedowns from 
the 402 program, funding for these programs must also be considered 
when determining the Section 402 appropriation level. 

One program that Is a drawdown from the Section 402 program Is the 
Section 410 Alcohol Impaired Driving Incentive Grant Program. These 
grants are awarded to states that Implement effective programs to 
reduce traffic safety problems resulting from persons driving under 
the Influence. The authorized level for the Section 410 program Is 
$25 million. Illinois supports an appropriation at least at that 
authorized level. 

Motor Carrier Safetv Assistance Program 

Illinois requests an PT 1994 appropriation as close as possible to the 
$80 million authorized In the ISTEA. The Motor Carrier Safety 
Assistance Program (MCSAP) provides grants to the states for 
enforcement of federal truck safety standards. The Illinois State 
Police use MCSAP funding to Inspect trucks, especially those carrying 
hazardous materials, to ensure that truck transportation Is occurring 
In a safe manner. In addition, grant funds are used to Implement the 
Commercial Driver's License Program, which requires that states test 
commercial motor vehicle operators for knowledge and ability to 
operate a commercial motor vehicle. 

Airport I mprovement Program 

Illinois supports an Airport Improvement Program (AIP) obligation 
celling at least at the FY 1993 authorized level of $2.05 billion. 



2708 



The Aviation Trust Fund, which currently has an unobligated balance of 
approximately $5.6 billion, could support even higher funding levels. 

According to an American Association Council International /American 
Association of Airport Executives study, capital airport needs over 
the five year period (1992-1995) will approach $50 billion. In 
addition, the backlog of unfunded airport grant project 
pre-appll cations at FAA Is presently estimated at $7.5 billion. 

Continued progress In Improving the safety and efficiency of our air 
transportation system depends on a program which will provide funding 
that Is adequate not only to ensure that our airport Infrastructure Is 
maintained but which will permit additional upgrading and expansion 
where necessary. 

This concludes my testimony. I am keenly aware of the pressures you 
face trying to meet the demands for Increased transportation funding 
given the tight federal budget constraints. However, an adequate and 
well-maintained transportation system Is critical to the nation's 
economic prosperity and future growth. Your recognition of that and 
your support for the nation's transportation needs over the years are 
much appreciated. 

Again, thank you for the opportunity to discuss Illinois' 
transportation funding concerns. 



2709 



INDIANAPOLIS, IN 

STATEMENT OF THE CITIZENS FOR APPROPRIATE RURAL ROADS 

[CARR] 

This subcommittee has received a request for $17.7 million 
for design and engineering studies for the Indiana portion of 
the Indianapolis to Houston highway corridor, referred to in 
Indiana as the extension of 1-69 from Indianapolis to Evansville. 
It is important for you to know that there is widespread, deep 
and increasing opposition to this highway proposal in Indiana. 
Because of this growing opposition, supporters of this project 
are anxious to speed up the work and stay ahead of the rising 
tide of dissent. In this situation we believe prudence and 
careful consideration of all alternatives are more important 
than speed. We ask you to deny further funding for this project 
until all alternatives are considered. 

Citizens for Appropriate Rural Roads, Inc. (CARR) is 
composed of citizens throughout Indiana who believe that there 
are more efficient, fiscally responsible alternatives to this 
project, as it is currently being studied. Our organization 
has been in existence for over 2i years. Exhibit 1 is a copy 
of our petition that has been signed by over 4,000 citizens. 

In this testimony we will show that construction of this 
highway would be fiscally irresponsible in the highest degree. 
We will show that several professional, independent economic 
feasibility studies have documented that another Indianapolis 
to Evansville highway would not be a prudent use of tax dollars. 
We deny the claim that this highway will have national 
significance or that it is necessary to improve the economy 
of Southwest Indiana. We will show that upgrading and repairing 
existing roads, in a way that the Indiana Department of Transpor- 
tation (INDOT) itself has proposed, would do more good for more 
people, cost taxpayers much less, create as many or more jobs, 
be much less damaging to the environment and agricultural areas. 
Upgrading and repairing existing roads is a more responsible 
use of tax dollars. 

Please note that our testimony refers mainly to the Indiana 

portion of the Indiana to Houston corridor. No studies have 
been done to determine the feasibility of the entire project, 
but many have been done on the Indiana segment. If the 
feasibility of the Indiana segment is dependent upon the entire 
route, then a whole new feasibility study should be done before 
any more money is spent in Indiana. If the Indiana segment 



2710 



is considered to have Independent utility, then the past studies 
are relevant. 

To help dispel the perception that this legislative body 
is nothing more than a rubber stamp for any and all proposals 
brought before it by members representing special interests, 
we ask that you give our concerns and our proposals thoughtful 
consideration. 

Our testimony will address the following items: 

1. Numerous economic feasibility studies. Including a 
congressionally mandated study, have not recommended 
construction of this highway. 

2. This proposed route, using new terrain, is excessively 
expensive and damaging. 

3. There are reasonable alternatives to this proposed 
highway using existing highways. 

4. Public input into this project has been restricted 
by an undemocratic process. 

1 . PRIOR STUDIES, OR LACK THEREOF 

In 1988 Congress appropriated $500,000 for an economic 
feasibility study to determine the merits of another major 
highway connecting Indianapolis and Southwest Indiana, 
specifically Evansville. That study, commonly referred to as 
the Donohue Study (Ref.1), did not recommend the construction 
of any of the alternatives studied, including the currently 
proposed route (Exhibit 2). Exhibits 3 and 4, from the Donohue 
Study, list the benefit/cost ratio for the various routes 
studied, and the Net Present Value of the Benefits. Exhibit 
5 is a letter from Mr. Cleckley of the Federal Highway 
Administration (FHA) stating that based on the Donohue Study 
the FHA concluded that "...the proposed highway is at best 
marginal from a cost-effectiveness standpoint." This FHA report 
was submitted to Congress in July, 1990. 

The Donohue Study was only the latest in a series of studies 
done to examine the feasibility of another north-south highway 
in Indiana (Exhibit 6). None of those studies recommended the 
construction of another major highway in Indiana. 

As of 1986 Indiana had 1118 miles of interstate highways, 
which made it thirteenth in the nation in total Interstate 
highway miles. In land area Indiana is 38th. Indianapolis 
has more interstate highway connections that any other city 
in the nation. 

To counter the negative conclusions of these independent 
studies, highway proponents have contracted with various groups 
to get the conclusions they desired. These counter studies 



2711 



are the ones most often quoted by the highway proponents to 
justify their case. These studies are listed in the reference 
section of this text (Refn. 2,3,4) 

I encourage members of this committee to read these 
"studies" and compare them with their taxpayers funded Oonohue 
study to determine for themselves which are credible and should 
serve as the basis for spending $1 billion in transportation 
funds. 

Proponents of this highway now claim that another highway 
from Bloomington, Indiana, to Evansville Indiana, could be one 
leg of a Canada to Mexico highway. They claim such a project 
would be a tool for the implementation of North American Free 
Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and as such would have greaty economic 
potential. We believe this is a poorly disguised ploy to justify 
a local highway project that has failed to find Independent 
justification. 

Several Canada to Mexico highways already exist 
(Exhibit 7). Please note that at least three of these connect 
with Indianapolis. In a letter written to INDOT by Mr. J. 
ThrelJceld of the FHA, he states that the Canada-Memphis idea 
was "a somewhat specious argument because, as a casual glance 
at the map of the Federal-aid highway system will show, there 
is already a relatively direct interstate system between these 
two cities," (Detroit and Memphis) (Exhibit 8). From Memphis, 
two interstate routes already connect to Mexico. 

In another letter to InDOT Mr. ThreDceld listed several 
alternatives to the currently proposed project which may obviate 
or lessen the need for the proposed highway/ These include 
SR 67/57; SR 37, SR 45, SR 231, 1-64; SR 37, US 50, SR 57; 
SR 37, US 50, US 41 (Exhibit 9). 

To argue that another north-south highway, one that must 
go through Bloomington and Evansville, Indiana, will have 
national significance is clearly self-serving and not credible. 

Since no studies have been done to determine if another 
north-south Interstate is feasible, spealcing of the Indiana 
link in such a system is highly presumptive and speculative. 
It cannot serve as the basis for spending $1 billion in taxes. 
The Indiana segment must be shown to have independent utility 
and be justified on that basis alone. Since this highway has 
failed that test, further funding for it should be rejected. 



2712 



2. THE PROPOSED ROUTE FOR THE 1-69 EXTENSION IS EXCESSIVELY 
EXPENSIVE AND DAMAGING. 

A. Agricultural Costs 

Southwestern Indiana is primarily an agricultural region 
with deep, fertile soils. As proposed, the new highway, using 
all new terrain will seriously disrupt agricultural operations. 
Mr. Gary Seibert (Erosion Control Technician, Indiana Department 
of Natural Resources (DNR), Division of Soil Conservation) 
has calculated that, along the most likely route, a minimum 
of thirty-five farming operations, in Gibson County alone, will 
be impaired by the proposed highway. These include six of the 
fourteen dairy operations in that county. Mr. Seibert estimates 
that these six operations alone each have a gross annual income 
of over $500,000. Since it is estimated that this income is 
spent back into the community six times, losses to these farming 
operations will spread throughout the community. 

Gibson County is now an economically stable rural community. 
Some of the affected farms have been in one family since the 
Civil War. The present transportation system is adequate to 
serve this region and the proposed highway would cause economic 
hardships. We have heard similar predictions from farmers in 
other counties along the proposed route. Contrary to highway 
proponent claims, this highway will not be an economic 
development tool for rural areas, it will in fact be a 
continuation of rural exploitation schemes of the past. 

B. Environmental Costs 

The Donohue Study states that the proposed highway will 
pass through very environmentally sensitive areas (Exhibit 10 
a ft b). Mr. McCloskey has stated publicly that environmental 
sacrifices will have to be made for this highway (Exhibit 11). 
This environmental destruction will not only cause much 
controversy, but also significantly increase the cost. That 
this will be a very costly route is confirmed by the draft 
Environmental Impact Statement (dEIS) for the first thirty-two 
miles from Bloomington to Newberry, Indiana (Refn.5). Due to 
the rugged, hilly, forested, karstic terrain, construction costs 
are estimated at between $300 and $400 million (Exhibit 12 
a ft b) for this segment alone. This computes to $12 to $13 
million per mile. This, however, will not be the total cost. 
Because of the sensitivity of karst regions to damage due to 
construction activity, new regulations are now under review 
by the InDOT (See Exhibit 13 a ft b for an explanation of karst 
terrain). It is expected these new regulations will increase 
construction costs significantly. 



2713 



Mitigation costs due to forest loss have not been 
determined. Large wetlands will be crossed further south and 
the mitigation costs for these losses have not been determined. 

Overall, mitigation costs, none of which are included in 
current cost extimates, are expected to be large. 

Another area of environmental concern is air quality. 
Indianapolis and Evansville are currently listed as non- 
attainment areas for ozone. This problem has not been addressed 
in planning for this highway. Increases in traffic would bring 
increases in ozone levels. Both the Intermodal Surface 
Transportation Efficiency Act, 1991 (ISTEA)and the Clean Air 
Act Amendments (CAAA) impose new planning regulations on 
metropolitan areas. An integrated planning process which 
coordinates spending ISTEA funds with requirements of CAAA is 
essential to prevent future conflicts and inefficiency in the 
expenditure of transportation funds. Since such planning has 
not been a part of this project, it violates the principle and 
spirit of ISTEA and CAAA. 
C. Limestone Costs 

Another important cost consideration is the effect of the 
highway on the dimensional limestone industry. Limestone from 
the quarries in this region of Indiana has been use in important 
buildings throughout the world. The Pentagon, the Washington 
Cathedral, the State Department, the Department of Commerce, 
and the Postal Department in Washington, D.C. were built with 
Indiana limestone. 

The cost of purchasing right-of-way through limestone 
reserves will be substantial (Exhibit 14). The dEIS estimates 
the value of these reserves at between $300 and $400 million 
(Ref. 5). It is doubtful the limestone companies will receive 
this much money; however, there is no doubt huge sums of 
transportation dollars will be used to buy out these reserves. 
There Is also the possibility that individual landowners with 
proven limestone deposits on their property will have to be 
compensated at levels comparable to what the limestone companies 
receive. These costs are not included in current cost extimates. 

This project should be a model for showing that 
environmental responsibility can also mean fiscal responsibility. 
We can avoid extreme environmental damage, agricultural losses, 
and expensive mineral buy-outs without sacrificing transportation 
quality and efficiency. The following section will give examples 
of how upgrading and utilizing existing highways can be a 
reasonable alternative to extravagantly expensive, destructive 
highways that use new terrain. 



2714 



3. REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ROUTE 

In its proposal for the National Highway System (NHS), 
InDOT Includes several highways in southwestern Indiana, 
including the proposed 1-69 extension from Bloomington to 
Evansville, Indiana (Exhibit 15). Besides the 1-70 to US 41, 
and US 231 connections between Indianapolis and southwestern 
Indiana, there is an existing four lane, divided highway from 
Indianapolis to Bloomington to US 50 at Bedford. US 50 is also 
in the NHS proposal. These three routes alone will give good 
access to southwest Indiana, including Evansville, from 
Indianapolis. Furthermore, the new terrain 1-69 proposal 
virtually parallels the SR 37 to US 50 routa to Washington, 
Indiana. There would be no apprecible savings in time or 
distance in the new terrain route over the route using SR 37 
and US 50. INDOT has already purchased right of way and plans 
to purchase more along US 50 to upgrade it to a four lane, 
divided highway. Also note that the all new terrain Bloomington 
to Washington, Indiana route connects with no towns with a 
population over 5,000. The SR 37 to US 50 route connects 
Bloomington with Washington via Bedford, population 14,000, 
as well as Shoals, and Loogootee. The NHS upgrades, as proposed 
by InDOT, will ma)te the 1-69 an extremely expensive, redundant 
highway. 

As currently proposed, the 1-69 extension will cost over 
$1 billion. Upgrades to US 41, with a bypass around Terre Haute, 
would cost approximately $250-300 million (Exhibit 16). Con- 
sultants for the InDOT have estimated that with those upgrades 
the I-70/US41 route would add only 8 minutes of travel time 
over the proposed new terrain route (Exhibit 17). In the same 
memo that disclosed this information, it was also stated that 
this minor time difference would not be included in the 
feasibility study for "political reasons". In this example, 
upgrading an existing facility would save taxpayers approximately 
$700 million , with very little difference in time or 
convenience. If 1-69 proponents wished, they could designate 
the I-70/US 41 route as the extension of 1-69 from Indianapolis 
to Evansville. Taxpayers would certainly benefit from this 
relatively minor change in the project. 

The Road Information Program (TRIP) study for 1991 states 
that more than 57% of Indiana's most heavily traveled roads 
are in poor to fair condition, and 40% of Indiana's bridges 
are structurally deficient or structurally obsolete (Refn. 6). 
Overdrive , a magazine for professional truckers, in a recemt 
issue rated Indiana's roads as the ninth worst in the nation. 



2715 



Upgrading existing roads to improve highway transportation would 
be a more efficient use of transportation dollars. It would 
put more people to work sooner and would result in more benefits 
to more people by spreading the improvements over a wider area. 
Adding 100 miles of unnecessary new interstate to an already 
seriously degraded highway system makes no sense at all. 

Proponents of the currently proposed route frequently cite 
highly inflated figures for the number of jobs the new interstate 
might create. For example they have stated figures as high 
as 5,000 jobs, for the entire Indianapolis to Houston corridor. 
Even if this number were correct, most of these jobs would be 
temporary construction jobs and low paying service oriented 
Jobs. Five thousand jobs for an estimated cost of $10 billion 
works out to $2 million per job. This is not an efficient 
use of scarce transportation funds. Not surprising is the fact 
that proponents of the new interstate seldom mention its cost. 

Representative McCloskey stated in a public meeting held 
in Bloomington in March of this year that, in his opinion, all 
alternatives should be considered in choosing the route for 
this proposed highway. In asking for design and engineering 
funds for the currently proposed route, he has contradicted 
his public statement. If you vote to extend more funds to this 
highway project, you are tying the taxpayers to an extravagant, 
extremely expensive, very damaging project that your own mandated 
study did not recommend for construction. 

4. UNDEMOCRATIC PROCESS 

In an InDOT sponsored meeting for the 1-69 extension held 
in an elementary school in Bloomington in October 1991, sheriff's 
deputies were present to prevent citizens from commenting or 
asking questions in public on this highway proposal (Exhibit 
18 a & b). Citizens who will lose their homes, farms and forests 
were directed to another room where they could put their comments 
in writing or stand in line to ask questions of InDOT officials 
in private. During their public presentation InDOT consultants 
repeatedly made misleading or outright false statements that 
could not be corrected because of the ban on public comment. 
As a result, many people left with misinformation. This meeting 
did not take place in China; it was in Indiana, USA. As noted 
in Exhibit 18 a & b, many people were extremely frustrated and 
infuriated by this blatantly undemocratic process. 
Representative McCloskey himself has publicly stated that he 
disagrees with InDOT 's meeting format. To date, there has been 
no change. Governor Bayh of Indiana has stated that he agrees 



2716 



with the format for these meetings. These meetings are typical 
of InDOT's arrogant attempt to diffuse opposition and stifle 
dissent on this highway. In fact, the meetings were nothing 
more that staged public relations events, obviously biased in 
favor of this project. 

ISTEA specifically and repeatedly mandates more public 
involvement in transportation planning. This highway, I remind 
you, is a part of ISTEA. 

CONCLUSION 

Because we were not informed of these hearings until they 
were almost over, we did not have enough time to include in 
our testimony all of our concerns with the 1-69 extension 
project. We have many more specific reasons to oppose it, as 
well as other alternatives to improve transportation in Indiana 
and the nation. We would be happy to submit them at your 
request. 

It is time for a change In the way public institutions 
and the government plan and decide on projects that will have 
a major impact on large numbers of citizens. This is partly 
what the last election was about. It is definitely what ISTEA 
is about. It is no longer acceptable to make decisions behind 
closed doors and then hold public hearings as a formality after 
the decisions have already been made. 

This highway project is a textbook example of the politics 
of the past. It was conceived by and Is being dictated by 
special interest groups for their perceived personal gain. 
And it is being used as a political and reelection tool by some 
politicians. 

We desperately need a new approach to transportation in 
this country. Our request is not unreasonable or selfish. 
We are asking for restraint, fiscal responsibility, and a 
reinstatement of the democratic process. This highway is a 
good place to start. Fortunately, it is early enough in the 
process to allow for reconsideration. With your help we can 
save taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, prevent 
unnecessary environmental and social damage, and begin the 
process of meaningful change in the governmental process. 

Please withhold any additional funding or earmarking of 
funding for this highway until all sides have been fairly heard 
and all issues honestly addressed. The choice is yours. Please 
give us a chance to be heard. 



2717 



REFERENCES 



1. Southwest Indiana Highway reaslbility Study . . .February. 1990 
by: Oonohue and Associatea, Inc. 

Cambridge Syetematics, Inc. 

Congdon Engineering Associates, Inc. 

2. The Future of Southern Rural Indiana; Paradigms and Prospects for Rural Indiana 
by: David Reed 

May, 1991 

3. The Mid-Continent Hi ghway (1-69)- An Investment in Americds Future 
commissioned by: The Southwestern Indiana Regional Highway Coalition 
(No date or authors given.) 

4. Addendum to the Economic Impacts of Highway Improvements in Southwestern Indiana 
submitted to the Indiana Department of Transportation 

for the city of Evansville and Vanderburgh County, Indiana 
sponsored by the Greater Evansville Chamber of Commerce 
prepared by Quantum Research Corp. 

Apogee Research, Inc. 

Bethesda, Maryland 

Dec. 1989 
(Note: This work was included as an addendum to reference 1. with a disclaimer 
by the authors of that atudy.) 

5. Indianapolis to Evansville Highway, Section 1-Bloomington to Newberry. Monroe, 
Greene, and Daviess Counties, IN. Feb. 1992 

Administrative Action Draft Environmental Impact Statement — U.S. Department of 
Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, and Indiana Department of Transportation. 

6. The Economic Impact of Increased Highway Funding in Indiana . Mar. 1991 
prepared by; The Road Improvement Program (TRIP) 

1200 leth St., NW, Suite 31A 
Washington, DC, 20036 



2718 



Exhibit 1 



«ELP SAVE" OVfL HURAL LANDS 
STOP WIQHWAY KOBBERY ! 



The proposed highway frcm Bloomington to Evansville, using new 
roadwiys, would tike the homes, land, and farms of many citizens. 

This highway would place an unacceptable tax burden on small 
coonunities and would be extremely damaoinq to the environment. 



THEREFORE, WE THE UNDERSIGNED REJECT THIS PROPOSED HIGHWAY. 

We call upon public officials to support appropriate road improvements 
that will preserve rural environments. 



Nam* and Addrau (Plaasa Prim) 



Signal ura 



Phone 



1. 






2. 






3. 






4. 






S. 






e. 






7. 






a. 






9. 






10. 







Please Return to: 



For More Information Call: 



CARR (Citizens for Appropriate Rural Roads) 
PO Box 54 
Stanford, IN <i7663 

B25-9553 



2719 



Exhibit 2 
fujort CONCLUSIONS or HIE sou tiu.'i:: ;t 

INDIANA HIGHWAY ri-ASinil.I lY SfUUY 
Fcbtuiiry 1990 

Prepared For 
Indiana DeparcmcnC of Transporcacion 

In Cooperation With 

Th« U.S. Department of Transportation 

Federal Hlgliway Administration 

By 
DonohuQ 6 Assoc, Inc. 
CainbridB« Systcinatlcs , Inc. 
Congdon Engineering Assoc, Inc. 

Concl\nton» 
'In conclusion, none of thk routes analyzed in this study are reconnncnd- 
ed for construction solely on an economic feasibility b.isis. This recom- 
mendation is based on the following: 

Low benefit/cost ratios were found for the rnnQc of .iltcrn.iclvc 
assumptions used in the sensitivity analysis, considered .is -i 
whole. Given these results, it is inappropriate to focus solely 
on the ratio resulting from the most optimistic set of assun<p- 
tions, when under several other sets of assuirpcions the ratio Is 
veil below 1.00. 

There is inherent uncertainty In any long-range economic forecast-' 

Ing process. The benefit/cost ratios developed in this study 
include employment and income benefits based on such f orec.ints . 

It is difficult to establish a specific benefit/cost rntlo which 

determines economic feasibility. However, Cambridge System.itlcs' 

experience in other states has shown that projects with bene- 

fit/cosc ratios In excess of l.S have been given priority funding. 

Vhile this ratio has not been sanctioned officially by any stace 
or organization, it has been found in our experience to repiesent 
a reasonable lover bound foe project selection. 

Funding vould require creation of a multi-county authority .md 
comnitmenC of considerable local dollars for a long time period. 
This would assume that th« highway is the hl(<hesc priority for 
each of cha counties along the route and that each county govern- 
menC'is willing to devote significant revenue sources to the pro- 
ject for about 30 years. There is no such precedent of this type 
in the area. If undertaken, this project vould be the most costly 
highvay built in the Stata eC Indiana since development of the 
interstat* system. 

Recoswendittons 
Based on the results of the benefit/cost evaluation, construction was 
not recomnended for an/ of the four alternatives. Uhile the A/Freeway 
alternative does have a benefit/cost ratio greater than one under certain 
assunptions, it does not nerit recommendation for construction given the 
magnitude of the ratio and the uncertainty Involved in long-range economic 
analyses. Economic evaluations for many highway projects in other states 
have resulted in benefit/cost ratios tanging from l.S to 5.0. This sug- 
gests that there may be other projects both Inside and outside Southwest 
Indiana that would represent better Investments. 

The five snail segments vlthln the three study corridors vith potential 
to provide economic and transportation benefits to the region should be 
considered for further study. 



2720 









• 














^ 










u 














S 


J* -M 








4 
















U ««4 


«n 






B£ 
















i§ 


4J 






<J 




•* 


•» 


m 


•9 




• 


•H 






C 




^ 


n 


m 


« 




^ 


5 




CM 

n 
u 

« 

•1 
u 

s 


3 

o 

U 

M 

a 
o 

• 

u 

<s 




o 


O 


d 


d 


• 

8 


• 
e 

a 

1 

•p4 


flea for cars and 
ue of soaa Cruck 1 






• 






^ 


m 


N« 


•» 


u 




• >4 






oa 


4J 




r% 


in 


in 


•n 






e « 








O 




• 

O 


o 


e 


• 

o 






• 






M 


u 
















>s^ 






3 














u 

i«4 

C 


O 


safer 
here c 






















•o > 




















« 


n 


c 




















« 




« • 














• 






u 




r^ 




O 






U 










§ 


^ 


w 




M 


^4 




••4 










O 


«i 


u -0 




H 


u 




U 


r« 


«» 


r^ 


o> 


u 


u 


«l C • 




^ 


M 


« 


M 


r» 


tn 


-» 


m 


n 


n 


O « «) 


^ 


O 


u 


>4 


• 


• 


• 


• 


^* 


o 


u u 


• 




o 


« 


r^ 


o 


o 


O 


O 


■o 


u 


•^ 


o 


H 


\ 


Of 


% 














NO <M 


—t 


t/» 


M 




« 










b 




•0 « 




O 


U 


u 


a£ 










O 




c c 


3 






c 

3 












<M 


e 
e 




03 


H 


« 


O 


u 










o 


v4 


<• « 


< 


tH 


c 


u 


•w 












U 


u w t 


H 


u. 


V 


VI 


u 


ON 


■* 


«» 


o 


K 


u 


w o. u 




Ul 


A 


•^ 


M 


OS 


>« 


«r» 


r» 


•^ 


3 


a. (Q -^ 




z 




a 


••4 


• 


• 




• 


•o 


u 


i: B 




w 


U 




e 


o 


o 


d 


O 


C 


u 


u o 




■a 


■^ 


« 


•^ 










« 


ID 


e 






B 


o 


w 










a 


c 


• c o 






2 


r^ 


a 










a 


O 


S-^ SI 






c 




o 










< 


u 






o 


















-^ « 






u 














e 




U M ^ 






u 




u 










«4 


? 


-i s 






F-4 




v4 










»» 


« • 


« u o 






<« 




U 


fn 


o 


w 


r«. 




n 


> -4 






c 


« 


« 


«M 


ON 


00 


ON 


u* 


u 


i« e 00 






o 


u 


•H 


• 


• 


• 


• 




>N « 


u u V 






•^ 


« 


^^ 


1^ 


o 


O 


O 


■o 


« o 


u u 






M) 


ae 


<« 










c 


> u 


>M ■ 






« 




« 










« 


• 


• 4 






« 


u 

c 


e£ 










r> 


«w e 

O O 


X u u 

U •«4 « 






■o 


3 












• 


• •>4 


w ^ 






c 


O 


u 










O 


u u 


• c e 






« 


u 


•«4 












Ji m 


T3 « 3 








n 


u 


•^ 


o» 


m 


r^ 


n 


DO BO 


3 "O 






u 


v4 


M 


•n 


o 


o* 


!-• 


• 


v4 ^4 


•-I -^ b 






« 


O 


-4 


• 






• 


w^ 


ki u 


u o 






« 




a 


^4 


r^ 


d 


t-* 


JO 


■p4 


e u «M 






9 


» 


v4 










n 


■ 


•^ e 








•n 


u 










H 


• 


c -o 








& 












^ ^ 


m V 








o 










O 


3 « 


u • u 




















w 


u e 


<M « 3 




















u 


c « 


« o 




















• 


-^s 


c m %i 














•o 






«M 


« W u 












>» 


« 






• 


O 


^ ^ l« 












4 


••4 






G< 


M U 


<w 










• 


9 


<M 








U >4 


w « « 










w 


« 


^ 








M > 


ecu 










3 


• 


•o 


« 


u 


• • 


e 


V) « « 










O 


u 


o 






U3 


u « 


3 ea > 










fltf 


bu 


1 






Z 


■-4 


CM 



t 



2721 



-H 

1-1 

JS 
X 

u 






M 

U, 
td 
Z 
lU 

CO N 

e 

tb o 
o •< 

M ^ 
9 04 

< 
> v> 

Z CD 

W 9> 



S 



& 



o 



c at 

m 

§ 

• o 

M U 

3 W 



w 

o 



c 



a 
o 
c 
o 
u 

UJ 



e 
o 

60 
« 

c 
<« 

« 

M 

3 






o 
u 

N 
O 

o 



m 
at 



c 
3 
o 
u 

M 






c 

3 
O 

u 






« 



u 
u 

M 



a 
o 



u 

u 



0£ 



U 

••4 
U 

m 
a 

•«4 

u 



m 
u 

9 
O 






O r>«. 

CM • 



i/> 



•« O O O 
•n ^ «n o 

»M «M C^ 1-1 



f 



<r) 



v> 



O 






9« r^ m \0 
m ^ o» • 



o fls «o 
•* <M m 



v> 



■o 
>« • 

h O 

11 



■Q U 



•o 




. 


M 


e 




n 


U 


« 




^ 


•M 






u 


IM 






3 


« 


• 




u 


e 


u 




u 


« 


c 






M 


s 




1 


jt 


• 




« 


u 


u 






3 


e 




M 


U 


^ 




hi 


u 


a 




m 
u 


8 






b 


o 


• 




O 


«• 


■o 




IM 




3 






(M 


^4 




•1 


e 


S 




u 

«4 


• 


•v4 




iw 


3 






« 


•-4 






e 


m 


w 




• 


> 


o 




^ 




e 






m 






XJS 






4J 


u 


^ 




« 

U4 


• 






4 


14 






n 


« 


"O 






X 


e 




"0 


> 


4 




c 








<o 


n 


• 




M 




« 




u 


•o 


u 




M 


C • 


M 




O 


« «l 







u 


u 


u 






»4 
CM Vm 






BO 


« 






e 


C 


e 




••4 


M « 


o 




u 


Wi ^ 


oM 




« 


11 


«J 




Wi 


U ■ 


^ 




« 


a u 


2 




a 


« -4 




o 


js a 


U 






U 


w 






c 


e 




• 


e e 


o 




«i 


-4 y 


u 




a 


« 






•w4 


« 






u 


w -^ 


"O 






O «9 


c 




•^ 


j: c 


« 


• 


« 


U O 




n 


> 


•mi 




u 


« 


o eo 


>N 


M 


u 


u V 


« 


o 


u 


u 


* 


u 




t-t I 






« 


« 


iw 


e 


X 


u u 


o 


o 


u 


•^ « 


t 


-.4 




u -o 


4J 


u 


« 


c c 


j: 


« 


■o 


« 3 


«o 


00 


3 


"O 


•>4 


«4 


^4 


>4 b 


h 


u 


u 


e 




•^ 


e 


U U4 




B 


•^ 





« 






C "0 


•o 


^^4 


M 


V 


a 


« 


U 


« u 


f-4 


u 


iH 


W C 


u 


e 


144 


« 3 


e 


• 


«l 


O 


-* 


s 


B 


«l u 




« 


u u 




o 


^ 


•^ « 


m 


M 




U4 


u 


■•4 


u 


• • 


n 


> 


« 


C u 





e 


n 


« w 


u 


« 


3 


<a > 



r<4 



2722 



Exhibit 5 



Hr. Thomas R. Tokarski 
Member, Citizens for 

Appropriate Rural Roads 
P.O. Box 54 
Stanford, Indiana 47463 

Dear Mr. Tokarski: 



y^!? I I T'l 



Refer to: HPD-1 



Thank you for your February 15 letter to Secretary of Transportation Samuel K. 
Skinner concerning the proposed Indianapol 1s-to-Evansvi11e highway. You 
explained your reasons for objecting to the proposal. We have been asked to 
answer your letter. 

We are aware of the feasibility studies you mentioned. At the request of 
Congress, we conducted the most recent one, which you referred to as the Oonohue 
Study. We worked with the Indiana Department of Transportation (IDOT) to 
evaluate the feasibility of the route and the potential economic, industrial, 
recreational, and community development benefits that night result. We sub- 
mitted our report to Congress on July 19, 1990, concluding that, 'Based on [an] 
analysis of direct highway benefits and the likely indirect benefits of economic 
development, the proposed highway is at best aarglnal from a cost-effectiveness 
standpoint.' 

We do not select projects, or tell the States which projects to fund. Instead, 
we make Federal-aid highway funds available to the State highway agencies each 
year by statutory fomula to help in their highway construction and Improvement 
programs. State highway officials are responsible for project selection and 
development within funding limits. The lOOT, therefore, has the sole authority 
to select projects for use of formula Federal-aid highway funds. Our role, when 
t^e lOCT decides to use Fcdersl-aid fundi, i$ to review the Stste'j work tc rske 
sure It meets Federal requirements and supports the State's decision on the best 
alternative for each project. 

The IDOT Initiated preliminary studies of the proposed highway, which will be 
conducted in accordance with Federal requirements. The many environmental and 
related laws, regulations, and policies will be followed. Including the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969. It requires preparation of an environmental 
Impact statement when a federally assisted undertaking will cause significant 
Impacts. The FHWA will provide technical assistance and grants approvals at key 
stages of project development. 

The IDOT chose consultants to study the route In three phases (Bloomlngton to 
Newberry, Newberry to Petersburg, and Petersbura to 1-64). The consultants are 
planning multiple opportunities for public Involvement. An Initial 
Informational meeting on December 10, 1990, attracted about 300 people. More 
recently, public Information meetings were held on March 6 In Washington and on 
March 7 In Evansvllle. 

I suggest that Citizens for Appropriate Rural Roads express Its concerns to the 
IDOT and participate In the public Involvement process. That way, you can be 
certain your views, and those of the organization will be heard. You will also 
have the opportunity to review and comment on the material released by the IDOT 
during the environmental review stage. The lOOT's address Is State Office 
Building, Room 1101, 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204. 
I cannot predict the outcome, but I can assure you that your concerns, and those 
of others who comment, will be considered. 

I appreciate your taking the time to let us know your views on the proposed 
highway project. I will provide a copy of this correspondence to our Division 
Administrator In Indianapolis, Mr. Arthur A. Fendrick, so he will be aware of 
your concerns. He will provide a copy to IDOT officials as well. 

Sincerely yours. 




hief 

ons Division 



2723 

Exhibit 6 

TABLE 1.1 
PREVIOUS HIGHWAY STUDIES PERTINENT TO THIS FEASIBILITY STUDY 



Date 



Study Title 



Findings or 
Recomnendaclons 



November 1966 



November 1980 



Indianapolis to Evansvllle Corridor 

Preliminary Feaslblllcy Report 

Proposed North-South Toll Road, 

Wilbur Smith and Associates 

and Its associated 

route design report 

Preliminary Engineering Report 

Proposed North-South Toll Road, 

Brighton Engineering 



Not feasible 
as a toll road 



Preliminary Feasibility Study 

Western Indiana Toll Road 

Ohio River Vicinity to Lafayette Vicinity 

Reld, Quebe , Allison, Wilcox and Associates, Inc. 

and 
. Wilbur Smith and Associates 



Not feasible 
as a toll road 



Hay 1982 



198^ Update 



November 1985 



November 1986 



Preliminary Feasibility Report 
Indianapolis • Evansvllle Improved 
North-South Corridor, 
Indiana Department of Highways 



Indianapolis • Evansvllle Improved 

North-South Corridor, 

Indiana Department of Highways 

Other Corridors In Southwest Indiana 

Feasibility Study 
SR 37 from 1-64 to SR 60. 
Indiana Department of Highways 



Special Study 
US 231 from 1-64 to Owensboro, Kentucky. 
Indiana Department of Highways 



Not recommended 
to pursue this 
corridor 
improvement at 
this time 

Cost update 
only, no 
recommendation 



Route 

acceptable, but 
further study 
recommended. 

Cost study only. 
no recommendation 



2724 



Exhibit 7 




cowna CMun 



2725 



Exhibit 8 



April 27, 1992 



MEMORANTOUM 




Mr. Ed Cox. Chief 

Division of Program Development 

Mr. James E. Juricic, Manager 
Environmental Assessment Section 
Division of Program Development 

Southwest Indiana Highway Corridor; Sections II and III, Environrr.enta! 
Over\iew 



Attached are the FHWA's comments on the overviews for the above referenced 
projects. Please forward the comments to whomever you deem appropriate. 



JEJ/ds 

cc: Mr. Jim Barr 

Attachments 



April 14, 1992 
HPR-IN 



Mrs. Katherine Lyon Davis 
Deputy Commissioner, Development 
Indiana Department of Transportation 
Indianapolis, Indiana 

Attention: Mr. James E. Juricic 

Dear Mrs. Davis: 

Subject: Project F-031-4(ll) jENv 

Southwest Indiana Highway Corrido 
Sections II & III Environmental Overview 




ASSESSMENT ;.f.^ 



We have reviewed the subject Environmental Overviews and offer 
the following comments. It should be borne in mind that the 
recent decision to develop one Environmental Impact Statement 
for the entire route largely renders moot the matter of 
Environmental Overviews. Having established that fact, general 
comments revolve around four points pertinent in varying degrees 
to both sections. 

1. The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 
(ISTEA) specifically identifies this corridor as an 
extension of 1-69. This fact negates much of the discussion 
concerning the proposed cross-section being a possible 
upgrade of SR-57 or some other 2-lane proposal. Therefore, 



2726 



the proposed alignment should be pursued as a 4-lane 
facility built to freeway standards, with alternatives being 
concerned with which alignment to follow. 

Furthermore, at least in the Section II Overview, there is 
some mention of the fact that this highway development could 
be viewed as an important link in the interstate system 
between Detroit and Memphis. This is a somewhat specious 
argument, as a casual glance at a map of the Federal-aid 
Highway System will show that there is already a relatively 
direct interstate system between these two cities. Also, 
discussion of another interstate link between Detroit and 
Memphis is not compatible with analysis of 2-lane 
alternatives for the Southwest Indiana Highway Corridor. 

2. The presentation of alternate alignments is very convoluted 
and difficult to follow in the Section III Overview. It 
would be advisable to organize this section into 
individual alignments and follow each through from 
beginning to end, comparing each in its totality. Also, 

in both Overviews for Section II and III there needs to 
be mention of a preferred alternate. 

3. Both section overviews include a relatively detailed "Early 
Coordination Replies and Responses" component. While this 
commentary is commendable, it is not absolutely necessary 
and would suffice to let the responding agencies' comments 
stand on their bwn in the appendix. 

4. Especially in the case of the Section III Overview, the 
consultants are reminded of the format guidance and other 
stipulations contained in the FHWA Technical Advisory T- 
6640. 8A, dated October 30, 1987, "Guidance for Preparing and 
Processing Environmental and Section 4(F) Documents". 
Although the Section II Overview essentially followed the 
prescribed format, it may be helpful to point out a few 
items that should not be overlooked in the preparation of 
the EIS. These include the List of Preparers, EIS 
distribution, relationship of local short-term uses vs. 
long-terra productivity and irreversible and irretrievable 
commitment of resources. 

In closing, it is reiterated that this review was very cursory 
in nature due to the decision to eliminate the Environmental 
Overview concept in favor of a full EIS. The technical data as 
presented appeared to be sufficient and the consultants are to 
be complimented for their efforts. By careful attention to the 
Technical Advisory and other comments cited above, much of the 
information in these documents should be transferable to the 
proposed EIS. 

Sincerely yours, 

Arthur A. Fendrick 
Division Administrator 



O 




By J. E. Threlkeld 
District Engineer 



2727 



Exhibit 9 



Ms. Katherine R. Lyon January 24, 1992 

Deputy Commissioner, Development HB-IN 

Indiana Department of Transportation 
Indianapolis, Indiana 



./• 



Attention: Mr. James E. Juricic 
Dear Ms. Lyon: 



Subject: Project F-031-4 (Oil) ; Bloomington to Newberry segment 
of the Indianapolis to Evansville Highway 
Monroe, Greene and Daviess Counties 

Dear Ms. Lyon: 

We have reviewed the subject preliminary draft environmental 
impact statement and offer the following comments: 

1. On page 166, in the "Comments and Coordination" section, 
the statement is made that early coordination letters were 
sent out on February 14 and 15, 1991. However, just below 
that statement is a table of responses which lists January 
28, 1991 as the response date of the National Park Service. 
In addition to this discrepancy, there is another National 
Park Service letter, dated September 3, 1991, which 
stipulates a number of conditions. There is no apparent 
response to this letter and, in fact, a failure to address 
the salient points in the letter. These points are as 
follows: 

A) that several large rest and recreation areas be 
included as recreation demonstration areas, 

B) that scenic strips, or very wide shoulder areas along 
some lengths of the highway be planted in wildflowers 
as "mini-ecosystems", 

C) that wildflowers be planted along shoulders and 
median, as well as at interchange vegetative islands 
and 

D) that mitigation should include contractual provisions 
for long-term maintenance, including ecosystem 
reestablishment and perpetuation. 

2. Page 2, 1st sentence of the 6th paragraph. The word "near" 
should be "nearly". 

3. Page 11, 2nd sentence of the 3rd full paragraph. The 
feasibility study was for the entire route while this EIS 
is only for 1/3, or less of the route. Assuming that 
"segmenting", as discussed in the September 3, 1991 
National Park Service letter, does not become a substantial 
problem, then there should at least be some clarification 
of the difference in segments to which reference is made. 
Furthermore, what kind of jobs are these (i.e., 
construction, short-term, long-term, direct, ancillary, 
etc.)- and for what time period? In light of the discussion 
on jobs, there is further discrepancy in the last partial 
paragraph on page 24. To wit, 387 new jobs does not sound 
like a very large number for such a vast undertaking, and 
also does not appear to be consistent with the data 
presented on page 11. Further such inconsistencies may be 
noted on page 25, 1st sentence in the 2nd full paragraph 
and on page 84, the third paragraph. Just how many jobs is 



2728 



this project expected to generate, for how long and what 
type? This information is critical in order to convey the 
economic impact of the proposed project. 

4. Page 11, 2nd and 3rd sentence of the 4th full paragraph. 

It should be possible to calculate economic implications of 
these two sentences by AASHTO methodology. 

5. Pages 12 and 83. What is the economic impact of taking 
these limestone reserves out of market? This should not be 
too difficult, as cubic feet of material for both lines C & 
D is quantified on page 83. This will be a particularly 
important issue to those whose lives will be impacted by 
loss of jobs, higher cost of remaining stone, etc. 

6. Page 13. The litany of favorable attributes that C offers 
over D includes the point that it involves no railroad 
crossing, as does D. From the reaps, it appears that C does 
cross a railroad spur adjacent to Tramway Road just 
southwest of Bloomington. There is also reference to this 
on page 64 in the 4th full paragraph. Unless this line is 
abandoned, another bridge structure would be required. 
There would have to be adjustments to the table on page 14 
commensurate with this corrected information. 

7. Page 24, 1st full paragraph. The narrative in general 
sounds a bit too presumptuous of the claim that I-70/US-41 
is the only alternative and that this proposed project will 
thus impact these routes so favorably. Concomitant to the 
preceding statement are the following points: 

A) Page 41. Mention should be made of scheduled jet 
air service between Indianapolis and Evansville as 
an intermodal alternative. 

B) Page 42. There are other existing alternatives 
(i.e., SR-67/57; 37, 45, 231, 1-64; 37, 50, 57; 37, 
50, 41; etc.) which should be mentioned that, 
collectively, may obviate or lessen the need for 
the subject project. 

8. Page 24, 4th sentence of 1st full paragraph. Insert "be" 
between "will" and "at". 

9. Page 21, 2nd sentence, 1st paragraph under "Intermodal 
Relationships". Insert "thereby" between "reduced" and 
"benefiting". 

10. Page 42, 5th paragraph. This evaluation could be somewhat 
ambiguous, depending upon how much of the existing SR-57 is 
utilized further south. 

11. Page 43, 6th sentence of the 5th paragraph. This should 
read " Monroe County west of SR-37". 

12. Page 48, Ist sentence at the top of page. This should read 
" crosses into Monroe County". 



13, 



14 



Page 56-61. These tables may be more appropriate at the 
end of "Preferred Alternative", just before "Affected 
Environment". They are somewhat of an irritant here and a 
disruption to the narrative. 

Page 62, 3rd sentence of the 4th paragraph. Delete "at 
which time" and insert "route" after Evansville. 



2729 



15. Page 62. It Is stated that interchanges will be 
constructed on US-231, SR-37 and SR-54. However, on page 
104 and other pages of the EIS, it is stated that 
interchanges will be developed at US-231, SR-45 and SR-37. 

16. Page 64, 2nd sentence of the 3rd paragraph. Delete "and" 
after "f loodplains" and insert ", which are". 

17. Page 66, 1st sentence of 1st full paragraph. This is 
redundant, as essentially the same statement led off the 
1st sentence of the previous paragraph. 

18. Page 66, 2nd full paragraph. It is stated that 6 acres of 
jurisdictional wetlands will be impacted by the project. 
The EIS should contain a complete discussion of the adverse 
impacts to wetlands and the mitigation measures. This 
should include wetland replacement, either by creation of 
wetlands or by purchase of wetlands. The discussion on 
page 106 does not suffice. 

19. Page 67, 1st sentence of 2nd full paragraph. The order of 
the sentence should be reversed to say "To our knowledge, 

the following environmental concerns ". Better still 

to say "The following environmental concerns are not 
apparent in the right-of-way ". 

20. Page 106. The reference to wetland mitigation is misplaced 
under "Visual Impacts". It belongs on page 123 and should 
be expanded and more specific as pointed out in item #18 
above. 

21. Pages 135-147 and pages 148-153. The relocation and right- 
of-way impact section is, overall, an acceptable discussion 
of salient points that are "required", in Technical 
Advisory T6640.8A. However, on page 144, the cost 
estimates should be rounded off (e.g., $8 million vs. 
$7,958,200) to prevent misunderstanding, or even prevent 
future commitment to spend this much. Furthermore, the 
report implies or assumes that the residences are all 
owner-occupied. A positive statement should be added to 
that effect. Otherwise, there should be an estimate 
included of any tenant-occupied housing. If there is 
indeed tenant-occupied housing, then rental replacement 
housing would have to be discussed to an appropriate 
extent. 

22. Page 156. Once again, the mitigation measures should 
include more attention to the points enumerated in the 
National Park Service letter, referenced in item #1 above. 

23. Pages 66, 125, 190 and 1,2-6. The USDA Forms 1006 do not 
appear to be complete. It appears that some points in Part 
VII are usually added to the points (78, in this case) in 
Part VI. The total of 78 points seems quite low. 

24. Pages 166-167. The number of "no responses" is unusual for 
a project of this magnitude. For example, it is difficult 
to imagine U.S. Fish and Wildlife not responding. Some 
sort of follow-up would seem appropriate to those agencies 
not responding. 

25. Pages 191-192. This is a duplication of pages 189-190. 
Page 190 should reference page 1-2 or page 1-2 should be 
moved to a position immediately following page 190. 

26. Pages D-2 to E-25. These pages may not be necessary in the 
DEIS and could, instead, be referenced. 



2730 



27. Page 1. The prefix for Mr. Threlkeld's phone number is 
226, rather than 269. 

We appreciate opportunity to participate in this concurrent 
review. Please respond with appropriate revisions at your 
earliest possible convenience so that the project can be 
advanced. 

Sincerely yours, 

Arthur A. Fendrick 
Division Administrator 




By J. E. Threlkeld 
District Engineer 



2731 



Exhibit 10a 



Potendal roadway construction impacts to the karst region Include 
lapacta to state and federally protected species, groundwater quality, 
unique geological features, and aesthetic iapacts to the rustic character 
of the region. Specific impacts to the karst region are addressed in more 
detail in Appendix to this report and in the separate technical memo. 

Protected Species and Nature Preserves 
The Indiana Division of Nature Preserves (DNP) , Department of Natural 
Resources, maintains a computerized data base of locations of threatened 
and endangered plant and animal species and high quality occurrences of 
natural areas. The DNP also manages the State Nature Preserve System. The 
DNP reviewed each of the proposed highway corridors and indicated over 
thirty occurrences of listed species, nature preserves, and over 43 natural 
areas under study or nomination for protection located within 1-5 miles of 
the proposed highway corridors. State law protects nature preserves and 
endangered and threatened animal species. Federal law also protects listed 
plant and animal species; however, no federally listed plants occur along 
any of the proposed alignments. 

The majority of protected species occurrences are located in wetland 
habitat along Alternatives A and B, and karst and forest habitats along 
Alternatives AB and C (Figure 12.1). Most of these occurrences are also 
located in areas previously undisturbed by development. 

Specific areas of environmental sensitivity within each alternative are 
shown in Figure 12.1 and summarized in Table 12.2. These environmentally 
sensitive areas were highlighted due to the presence of more than one 
potential environmental impact. Specific impacts to these areas are dis- 
cussed in the memo Sensitive Enviro nmental Areas accompanying this report. 
This memo also discusses areas where the proposed highway design would 
avoid potential impacts. 

Of all the proposed highway alternatives, the most environmentally 
sensitive areas occur on alignment through new location along Corridors AB 
and C (Figure 12.1). The combined presence of forest, unique geological 
features, and threatened and endangered species heighten the sensitivity of 
these areas to multiple impacts caused by highway construction and develop- 
Bent. 

Environmentally sensitive areas along Corridors A and B tend to occur 
as smaller, more widely scattered units- due to the greater use of existing 
highway in the project concept. Host of the environmentally sensitive 
areas occur along urban bypasses on new terrain or at river crossings where 
bridge construction and highway Improvements would require evaluation of 
wetland impacts. 



2732 



Exhibit 10b 
I 

CHAPTER 12 
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES 

Introduction 
Thli chapter revlcwg tone of the netural resource end cultural resource 
Issues associated with potential highway construction and development In 
Southwest Indiana. These Issues would require evaluation during the Route 
Location and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) phase. If plans for high- 
way construction proceed. A list of these Issues and the state and federal 
laws regulating potential Impacts to these resources Is shovn In Table 
12.1. 

Other Impacts will need to be addressed In the EIS such at social, 
noise, air quality, etc., but these are not discussed In this chapter. 
Although all of these Issues are Important ones that must be addressed, the 
natural resource Issues were Judged to be the ones that would most signi- 
ficantly affect location decisions and project costs for this area of 
Indiana. Based on our experience on other environmentally sensitive pro- 
jects, environmental mitigation costs for natural and cultural resources 
could be significant for this project. In addition, considerable Input 
from environmental groups and concerned cltlrens has Indicated that certain 
segments of each of these corridors could become highly controversial and 
possibly Involve litigation. 

In addition to this chapter, a more comprehensive discussion of speci- 
fic environmental Issues within each alternative is Included In Appendix D 
under the title Sensitive Environmental Areas . A separate memo, Supple - 
mental Natural Resource Memoranduni. Is on file with Indiana DOT which con- 
tains additional detailed natural resource Information, Including maps 
showing locations of sensitive features and agency comments. Figure 12.1 
highlights particularly environmentally sensitive areas within each alter- 
native. Figure 2.1 In Chapter 2 shows many of the features referred to In 
this section. 

Information for this chapter was gathered from various state and 
federal agencies which reviewed the proposed highway plans and provided 
comments on maps and In written form. These are Included in the aforemen- 
tioned memo on flic with Indiana DOT. In addition to these governinental 
agencies, various other environmental organizations and private citizens 
provided useful Information In compiling this chapter and are also listed 
In this memo as Important sources of public Input and additional scientific 
knowledge on Issues associated with highway planning In Southwest Indiana. 

Because route location details were not developed In this study, rather 
broad corridors along Alternatives A. fi and C were examined for potential 
environmental Impacts (refer to Figures U.2», 4.2b and 6.2c In Chapter ^ 
for corridor locations). Therefore, the issues described here should be 
viewed as representational of Issues that might result when more specific 
alignments are established In the route location phase. 



2733 



Exhibit 11 



[Fram the Bloomington Herald-Times, May 1, 1991] 

Congress Hears Both Sides of Evansville Road Case 



■irTtaiMdiMa 

H-T StBff Wrttif 

A tpoktmtn fo r a cltlit ni' 

pOtip OppOMQ to t prop(MM'l&* 

tentatc Uffawar between Bloom- 
Infton and EransrUle took od a 
concressman and a maror dorlns 
aU^ House rabconunlttee bear- 
ing on Capitol HIQ Taesday. 

Tbe tbree took tares addres- 
line the Hoose Appropriations 
Subcommittee on Transportatloo, 
which will decide whether to ap- 
mart a requested 18 million m 
federal money for deslcn work on 
tbe project 

Speaklnf In bvor were Stb Dis- 
trict U^. Rep. Frank McCteskey, 
• Democrat from SmlthvUle, and 
Eransrllle Mayor Frank McDon- 
ald IL 

Tm optimistic this pn^ect will 
get approval," said McCloskey af- 
ter the bearing. "In the scope of 
federal spending, it's a very rea- 
sonable amount we're asking for. 

"It's a case of economic devel- 
opment and Jobs. The entire 
•onthwest quadrant of the state is 
now without a good road between 
Indianapolis, our capltol and 
EransrUle, our third largest dty. 




vBiff 'wp wf vwn Mm 



We need this road." 



McCloskey told lawmakers a' 
study commissioned by the 
Evansville Chamber of Com-i 
meroe estimates that a saf^, Cast, 



direct nxria between the two dt- 
tas would Btfannlat* axlstlng bual- 
nwa, •ddlcf about 7B0 mw loba. 
Ha Mdd tba ttody also prefects 
that new boslnesies along the 
route would erect* al many as 
illOnewJoba. . . 

< Tbe study McCloskey referred 
to estimates that decreases In 
travel time, savings In vehicle op- 
ertting coats and aoddent losses 
wooM amount to savings of |l.oe 
bill ion b etween the years 2000 
'and2020. •,. :.•••• 

McCloskev iJso told the tub-' 
oofnmltte« the highway would Im- 
prove Interstate commerce, ac- 

' cess to tbe Crane Naval Weapons 
Support Center In Martin County, 
and trade between the VS., Cana- 
da and Mexico. Re pointed out 

- that Indiana Gov. Evan Bayb has 
already committed t240 million in 
state dollars for the project and is 
now doing a tZJ million engl- 

'^ neerlng study along the corridor 
to pick the best route. • 
' voldng opposition to the find- 
ing was rural Bloomfleld resident 

: PhlUlp Foster, who represented 
Citizens for Appropriate Rural 
Roads. The group consists of 



••« Road, pace CS 



Read, from page CI 



about two dozen mostly niral resi- 
dents who either stand to lose por- 
tions of Ibelr property to the new 
highway's right-of-way, or whose 
normal east west travel routes will 
be bisected and lengthened by a 
new limited access Tour-lane. 

Poster told tbe committee the 
highway would save only 13 miles 
between Indianapolis and 
Evansville. compared to the exist- 
ing four-lane route which loops 
west to Terre Haute, based on a fed- 
erally funded study released last 
year. 

But Indiana Department of Trans- 



portation bearings officer Don 
Shields has said state estimates 
based a four preferred alternate 
routes show a distance savings of 
t>etween 20 and 38 miles, with the 
fastest saving about IS minutes in 
travel time between the two cities. 

Foster told tbe subcommittee 
state tax dollars would be wasted on 
the project — dollars that could be 
spent to repair existing rural roads 
and for education. 

'There Is only so much money to 
go around." said Foster after the 
bearing. "Is this the best use of In- 
diana money?" 

Foster also told the committee the 
environment would suffer If tbe 



road is built He said 4,000 acres of 
wetlands are along the proposed 
corridor between Newl)erTy and In- 
terstate 64, and that many could dry 
' up or become polluted by the pro- 
ject He also said valuable forest 
and farmland would suffer in a part 
of the country where these t>T)es of 
habitat are already dwindling. 

McCloskey acknowledged there 
are environmental costs to the pro- 
ject but that they can be minimked 
and are worth the sacrifice to Ira- 
prove the region's economy. 

Foster said be doubts his group 
will win, but it will keep up the 
light 

"We're not going to quit, but I ex- 
pect that It w iU be fUndedy ' Foster 
said "We wen given no indication 
up here today that It won't be. We 
wUl continue to attempt to expand 
our support base. Hopefully, It's out 
there.-^ 



2734 




2735 



Exhibit 13a 

and If dlttrubcd could Inpact vtlls, pendi, lakei and tcrtaat by actd and 
coxlc runoff. Such potanclal Impacca to vatar quality would raqulra 
avaluatlon In cha EIS prior to highway conatrucclon. 

Coal aapa provldad by Cha U.S.C.S. ara Includad In tha aatarlali 
accoapanying chlfl final raport for uaa in tha dacallad highway d«flgn 
through chaaa araaa. Tha watlanda invantory aapa (aantlonad in tha Uac< 
lands sactlen of chla chapcar) ara also usaful In Idantlfying coal ponds. 

Llaastona la anothar Isportanc alncral rasourca in this araa. Salaa 
llacstona is quarrlad fron araas In the AB and C Corridors. It is possible 
that naw roadway construction in thasa cerridora could iapaec this 
rasourca. 

Unique Caologieal Faaturaa 
Tha cars karat topography refers to landscape features which fora as a 
result of the aubsurfaca diversion and aolution of surface water to 
underground routes where they erode and diasolve the bedrock into unique 
geological faaturaa auch as cavea, alnkholas. underground springs, rising 
and disappearing rivers. 

Karst topography occurs along approxiaatcly 2,000 square alles of 
Hissistippiari liaestone outcrop in Southwest Indiana (Figure 1.2) and is 
considered to be of global significance by geologists »» a classic exafflple 
of well developed karst features. Several anvlronaental groups have worked 
to protect this region over the years including tha Indiana Karst Conser- 
vancy, the Lost River Conservation Task Force, the Nature Conservancy, the 
Hoosier Cnvironacntal Council as well as state and federal agencies. 

Significant stretches of each of the alternatives occur on karst topo* 
graphy on new alignaent. National landaarka. nature preserves, nuaerous 
caves and other karat features, and unique habitat for rare species occur 
particularily within the corridor of Alternatives AB and C. 

The biology of the karst region is also unusual, as the subterranean 
cnvironaent provides habitat for a variety of specialized species such as 
albino fish and crustaceans. - Many of these are state and/or federally 
listed threatened or endangered apecies, such as tha northern cavefish 
( Awblyopsls spelaea ) . In addition, caves provide reproductive and winter- 
ing habitat for three protected apeclea of bata Including the atata and 
federally endangered Indiana bat (Uxfilil aodalta ^. 

Of particular interest within Corridor C la tha Lost River watershed 
which has been proposed as a National Konuaent by the Lost River Conserva- 
tion Task Force of the National Speleological Society and currently is 
under study by the National Forest Service for noalnatlon into tha National 
Wild and Scenic Rivera prograa. This region occupies approxiaately 353 
square alias in sections of Dubois, Lawrence, Orange. Martin, and Vashing- 
ton Countiea. The Lost River flowe as a conventional river for nearly 
three -fourths of its 78 -alls course, then disappears underground leaving a 
dry river bed froa which flood waters often resurge unpredictably. 



2736 



Exhibit 13b 

CAVERNS AND SINKS 

Limcsione caverns show what ground water can do in its 
age-long task or dissolving rock underground. Take Mammoth 
Cave, in Kentucky, as an example. 

Some 225 to 27S million years ago, an arm of ihie Guir of 
Mexico gradually reached up through what is now the central 
United States. For perhaps 30 million years it stayed there. 
Then the land was uplifted and the sea retreated, leaving a de- 
posit of limestone oovenng thousands of square miles. This 
rock, reaching a maximum thickness of 1.200 feet in Kentucky, 
had formed from minerab in the sea water and from the limy 
remains of untold trillions of tiny sea plants and animals. 

As the sea withdrew, rains filled the limestone strata with 
fresh water. Through cracks and crannies in the rock water 
kepi flowing. Oxygen and carbon dioxide, picked up by the 
water from air and from planu, helped the water to dissolve 
the mineral caldum carbonate out of the limestone. (Lime- 
stone is mainly calcium carbonate.) Slowly the water made 
larger and larger channels, and some of these eventually be- 
came Urge caverns. Roofs of the deeper cavities collapsed, be- 
cause of the weight of the overlying rock, but numerous cav- 
erns near the surface remained inucl. 

Mammoth Cave is one of the largest networks of caverns so 
far discovered. Today, because the water uble has fallen, we 
can explore the upper cavities. Those farther down are still un- 
der water. 

In caverns above the water Uble we find sulactites and 
sulagmites. In a process that ukes thousands of years for the 
big ones, these odd structures are built by water oozing from 
cave ceilings and dropping to the floor. 

As water emerges from a ceihng, some of the carbon dioxide 
in it escapes. Since it is this gas that has enabled the water 
to keep calcium carbonate in solution, the water on emerging 
deposiu a little of the mineral. Continuing deposition at an 
opening may form a stalactite. 

Ordinarily a stalactite surts as a ring around an opening and 
grows as a tube. Eventually the tube becomes blocked, but 
growth of the stalactite may continue as water trickles down 



2737 



|,|pip|Ki»i<P!lgHt iWHW^ ^ > «< wcfc h or liMictfoae and BUndi- 
Ki|^^iplyiili,i#1Miii»4»l^ tiiftd, 'water dnUM ibwa rapidly llifoti|^ 
dif rack, diMBhrIng il to fonn i lal r lwl t a, ctvcrM* aad other fleaiurej.' 

over the ouuide. Most very large stalactites— those many feet 
long-probably take tens or hundreds of thousands of years to 
build. 

Stalagmites are formed by water that falls to the cave floor. 
Here calcium carbonate builds upward in piles that suggest **re- 
verse** stalactites. Where a stalactite and a stalagmite meet, a 
column or pillar is formed. 

GrottAd water has been dinolviBg away the thick limestone 
of Kentucky and louihem Indiana at the rate of a foot of etc- 
vaiion each 2,4MN> yean. Bcneaib the land lurfaoe are millions 
of miles oT'Channda, lafge md Hml,,an4 |he countiyiide is 
doaed' with **iinkt.** ThcM are iMiUowt fonned where roofs if. 
cavea have ciellapaad m wiMia nirfacc ttfcams plunge down 
intot— daqtaamid rtiannria, Tlw; laf|B, peiwanent streams that 
go linde rg geiind Wi> caHed-loit ri we lm . ^ 

The modem sport of **spclunking.** or exploring limestone 
caverns, has become highly popular. Systems of water>made 
tunnels, some of them miles long, are a challenge to the inge- 
nious and the daring. Water-filled channels are sometimes ex- 
plored by swimmers with artificial breathing devices. Spelunk- 
ing demands special equipment and great skill, and is safe only 
in groups with experienced leaders. 



2738 



Exhibit 14 



[From the EvansviUe Courier, June 16, 1991] 

New Highway Has Limestone Industry Edgy 



QRAV 

Cbialv Mifr wrIHr 



i//£/ll 



EncutiTM from lodiuu'* UmwtoB* inductiy 
will maJu tb« trip Knith to Waahiaftao, Ind, thto 
•ftmioon to k««p an «Ti OB th* UtMt BegotiAtioiw 
for tho BraniyiUo to IndianapoUi higfawaj. 

Tha Indiana Department of Tranaportatioo 
wHl bold a public Marine about tba p r op oaed 
bigbway today from 4 to 8 pjn. at Waablngton . 
HighScbooL 

Liffiwiono l a p iea cn tatJTM wlU be oo band «• 
IiumIiiU ^ir oonoenia about the bigbway routaa 
-tbej WKj could decimate tbelr buiineaeea and a 
natural reaouroe unique to eo^tb central Indiana. 

"Iliflee laat two routea go rigbt tbrou^ our 
reoema and if tbey don't dflTiateaomeit'e going to ' 
take billiona of ddlan wortb of UmeatoDA," aaid . 
Judy ZUiott, aecretary-treaaurer of Elliott Btona . 
06. iB Bedford, Ind. ;iV'>j |. o. - «- *' ' , 
V ' One of tbe routaa, X," eroaaea mon than 200 
trndataloped aeiea of Elliott 1an4 on which thii.. 



Continued from PaQe Ai 
company planned to open quar- 
riea, aaid Mn. ElUott 

An Evanflrille company made 
the initial route propoaala for tbe 
Bloomington to Newberry aeg- 
men! Iti preaident said be believea 
Route C preaenta tbe least damage 
to limeatone reeerrea. 

"^e baTe takao into account 
tbe reeerrea and in Cact one of tbe 
routea baa pretty minimal impact 
— Route C." aaid Keith Locb- 
mueller, preaident of Bcmardin. 
LocbmueUer and Aaaodatea. 

Locbmueller aaid aurTeyon 
hav« been waUdng tba route and 
be belierea any conoema can be 
mitigated before moring into 
conatruction. 

"Rigbt now they're (limeatone 
induatry) wanting to expr eaa their 
oonoema and once they eraluate 
the final route tbeyll mo if a not 
that much of a problem," be aaid. 

Donald Carrer, branch bead 
for mineral reaouroea and data 
management at the Indiana Geo- 
logical Surrey in Bloomington, 
aaid both propoaed routea (C and D) 
eroaa high quality limeatone 
depoeita. 

Limeatone baa to be quarry 
mined in huge aolid chunks weigh- 
ing up to 20 tona, which then are 
alowly cut with diamond-tipped 
aawa into building blocks, "nie 



•tone ia unique to aouth central 
Indiana and ia aou^it aa an ex- 
tremely durable building 
materiaL 

"TUa ia the only place in tha 
world where thia oarticular lime- 
stone can be found and thoae peo- 
Ele who say thia (highway) will not 
urt the industry really don't 
know what they're talking about," 
said Patsy Fall, preaident of B.O. 
Hoadley Quarriee in Bloomington. 
An Indiana Department of 
Transportation spokcaman cau- 
tioned that the planing pioc ea s is 
still in its early stages. Now that 
the department knows about tbe 
limestone reeerrea, that problem 
can be dealt with. 

"Hopefully we wiD be able to 
come up with a eompromiaa," aaid 
Don Shialda, a state transporta- 
tloo department spokeaman. "We 
originally knew there would be a 
problem with the limeatone but we 
didn't know tha extent of the 
problem. 

Shields said tha state would 
eompenaate affected c om pa nie a. 

Mn. Fell agreed with Mia. El- 
Uott ttiat compttMation could run 
Into tits bmiooa of doDan if they 
broQ^ in custooMn from around 
the world to teattfy about its worth. 

"A broks state like Indiana 
could not alirord to pay for tba 
loaa." aaid Mia. FeO. 



2739 



Exhibit 15 



LEGEND 



A 1l«l* St*'w**'H«l 







INDIANA 

PROPOSED NATIONAL HIGHWAY 

SYSTEM 



APRIL 1993 



2740 



Exhibit 16 

TABLE 2.3 

PRELIVIIU&T CONSTRUCTION RIGHT-OF-VAT 

AND ENGDrEEtlNC DESICN COST ESTIMATES 

(COST IN MILLIONS) 





Highway Claaeifici 


ition 


Alternative 


4-Une 
Super 2 Modified 


4 -Lane 
Freeway 




Evanivllle Corridor 




Al 
A2 
A3 
AA 
AS 
A6 



$201 $393 
$173 $676 
$257 $536 
$219 $577 
$215 $577 

Jasoer Corridor 


$219 
$665 
$689 
$761 
$767 
$822 


Bl 
B2 
B3 


$355 $675 
$313 $666** 
$268 $616** 

T«ll Clvy C&rrl^or 


1 


CI 

02 


$121 $235 
$160 $256 


... 



* Includes grade aeparationa and interchanges at najor intersecting 
highways . 

** B2 and B3 costs were also analyzed by segnent to determine their 

differential cost if the A5 alternative was constructed through this 

area. In this case. B2 costs would be $336 Billion and B3 costs would 
be $655 Billion. 



Submitter's Note: The single • refers to A-1, US-41. He added approxifflately $80 million 
to estimate current cost. estimates 

A-5 is the currently proposed route. Current estimates now place the 
cost at around $1 billion. Thia route would only aave 8 minutes over 
the 1-70 wid US-ill route (Exhibit 17). 

A through explanation of the routes can be found in the complete 
text (ref. 1). 



2741 



Exhibit 17 



[From The Evansville Press, Jan. 19, 1993] 

Memo: Indy Link Only 8 Minutes Faster 



Officials not likely 
to refer to estimate 



StaN rtportir 



An InUnial memorandum r«- 
leaaed by Um Federal Highway Ad- 
mtnlstratlon thowe that only 8 min- 
utes of travel time would be saved 
between Indianapolis and Evans- 
ville with construction of Interstate 
69. 

The handwritten note, part of a 
2 -inch package released to a Bloom- 
Inftoo. Ind.-based opponent of the 
$1 billion project, said the 8-mlnute 
travel margin probably would not t>e 
Included In an environmental study 
for "political reasons." 

The memo, written April It. 
lOUl. by FHWA environmental en- 
gineer Larry Hell, said driving from 
Indianapolis on Interstate 70 west lo 
U.S. 41 and south to EvansvUle — 
the quickest existing route — would 
take only 8 minutes loncer than a 
trip along the proposed 1-09 align- 
ment. 

Hell added In the memo that, 
"given the poUtlcal nature of this 
project, no discussion Is expected In 
the document." a reference to the 
environmental Impact statement 
thst was being prepared for the In- 
diana Department of Transporta- 
tion at the time. 

In recent years, officials have 
•aid the extension of 1-69 south 
through Bloomington, Washington 
and Petersburg to EvansvUle could 



save 19 to 30 minutes In travel time 
while providing an impetus for new 
Industry to locate in the area. 

The 30-mlnute estimate remains 
vaUd, federal officials said, only if 
one travels lo Indianapolis through 
Bloomington — not by going north 
on U.S. 41 and east on Interstate 70. 

Hell wrote that the information 
about the 1-70/ U.S. 41 Ume differ- 
ence should l>e included In the "no- 
build alternative" section of the en- 
vironmental document. National 
Environmental Protection Act re- 
quires agencies to address what 
would happen if no project were 
built. 

The federal highway officials 
said today that the timi) estimate 

Provides an 8-mlnute difference 
ased on the likelihood that a bypass 
wUl be buUt at Terre Haute. Ind.. to 
■hunt traffic between U.S. 41 and I- 
70. 

Tom Tokarskl, the Bloomington 
activist, said the memo is evidence 
that federal officials were skepUcal 
of the need for the project and that 
they expected INDOT to sup- 
press the 8-mlnu(e estimate. 

"You have people here clearly 
withholding Information l>ecause It 
isn't favorable to the project." To- 
karskl said. 

Phil Schermerhom. an INDOT 
spokesman, said this morning be bsi 
not had an opportunity to view the 
released documents. Bet he said he 
said the debate over 1-69 has gone on 
for years. l>oth within and outside 
gotemment. 

Schennerbom said he doubted 



• 8m Indy. 



2742 



Indy 



the aeruracT ot the S-mlnute 
time differeoce. howerer. not- 
ing that drlTen who use U.S. 41 
have to contend with traffle 
lights and a 85 mph speed limit 

Tokarsld said he receircd 
the doctunent from INDOT af- 
ter sending three separate 
rounds of reauests to state offi- 
cials under tne Indiana Public 
Records Act and to federal offi- 
cials under the federal rreedom 
of Information Act 

The information would like- 
ly t>« used if Tokarvki's activist 
n-oup, Cltiiens for Appropriate 
Rural Roads, erer goes to court 
to fight the project, he said. 

Rot>ert L. Burch, assistant 
dirlilon administrator for the 
Federal HlghwaT Administra- 
tion's Indiana office, said the 
"political" reference concerned 
the nature of the project itself. 

The enrironmental study 
does not compare the proposed 
alignment to the existing 1-70/ 
U.S. 41 route because Congress 
authorised funds to study a 
highway route through Bloom- 
ington, he said. 

"The congressional mandate 
for the study said the highway 
has to go from Indianapolis to 
Bloomlngton to Eransville," he 
said. 

It Ls significant to note that 
the 1-70/115741 route is depen- 
dent on the construction of a 
bypass around Terre Haute that 
could significantly reduce trav- 
el time. 

The doc\uients released also 
included a letter from FHWA 
district engineer James Threl- 
keld that discounts a notion that 
has gathered strong political 
momentum recently — that of 
making the Evansrille-to-India- 
napolis highway part of a mid- 
continental artery linking De- 
troit with Houston. 

In Ute 1992, a coalition of 
business and political leaders 
from the eight states affected l»y 
the proposed highway gathered 
in Nashville. Tenn., and formed 
the bUd-Continent Highway Co- 
alition. The group is now con- 
tacting members of Congress la 



hopes of spurring new funds for 
the project 

But on April 14 — some six 
months before the formation of 
the Mid-Continent group — 
Threlkeld's assessment of mak- 
ing 1-69 a link from Detroit to 
Memphis was less optimistic. 

"This is a somewhat specious 
argument because, as a casual 
glance at the map the federal 
aid highway svstem will show, 
there Is already a relatively di- 
rect interstate system between 
these two ciUes," Threlkeld 
wrote. 

Tokarskl said the memo con- 
tradicts the notion that the high- 
way is needed to provide effi- 
cient transportation in the 
nation's financially ailing mid- 
section. 

The documents released also 
shed light on confusion involv- 
ing the consulting firm picked 
last year to do a full environ- 
mental impact statement for the 
Evans ville-to-Indianapolis 
stretch. 

Originally, the Evansville 
firm of Bemardin-Lochmueller 
it Associates was hired to do a 
full EIS on the Bloomlngton to 
Newberry section under a $1.2 
million contract. Two other 
firms were picked to write less 
rigorous environmental over- 
views. 

Then, after strong criticism 
al>out breaking up the project 
into segments. INDOT an- 
notmced in May that it would 
hire a new consultant to study 
(he entire route. The state agen- 
cy decided to stick with Bemar- 
din-Lochmueller. and told that 
to the federal officials in a July 
10 letter. 

A month later, the federal 
agency wrote back to say the 
contract should t>e put out to 
bid. U October. then-INDOT 
Commissioner John Dillon said 
the agency was considering sev- 
eral other consultants. 

Recently. INDOT an- 
nounced that Bemardin-Loch- 
mueller will do the work after 
all. but no dollar figure has yet 
been set 



2743 



Exhibit 18a 

[From the Indiana Daily Student, Oct. 28, 1991] 

IDOT Disallows Debate at Highway Meeting 



Fonnt and tape records were available in the 
ormnasium for the public to leave its comments. . 
Residents could also talk to engineers and view 
the two highway routes still under consideration. 

The C and D routes and a "no build" option 
are the only two being looked at based on past 
studies, said David Isley, part-owner of ^vans- 
ville-based engineering company Berheardin, 
Loclynueller tt Associates. 

The Evansville Hrm is in charge of planning 
the Bloomigton-Newberry section of the high- 
way. 

Isley said more than 4,000 environmental con- 
cerns were considered in the highway study for 
the Blooffilnglon-Newberry section. 

Potential effects on limestone quarries and re- 
serves, natural preserves and forest, and endan- 
gered animab nd plaau were included in the 
study. ' ■ ' 

To construct a 32-mile, four-lane freeway whh 
three interchanges between Bloomington and 
Newberry, costs would range between S3S6 and 
S4IS million, said Tom Cervone of the Evansville 
planning Tirm. 

A uansportatioa bill. approved by the U.S. 
House of Representatives last week includes 
S32.5 million to begin construction on the high- 
way. 

Residents should not feel intinuted by the 
IDOT tactics and should continue to express 
their opinioos, said Tom. Tokarski, director of 
the Citizem for Appropriate Rural Roads. To> 
karski held his own question and answer seaioa 
after the IDOT meeting. 



ByAHMMl 

MknalMlySludw« 

Monroe and Oreene county residents were vir- 
tually silenced Thursday evening at the Indiana 
Department of Traiuportation public informa- 
tion meeting oa the proposed Indianapolis-Ev< 
ansville highway. 

IDOT made three group presenUtions at 
Orandview Elemeiitary School, 34SS W. Ind. 43, 
updating residenu on developmental studies for 
the highway's Bloomington-Newberry segment. 

"We will not argue any poinu or debate any 
iuues tonight," said Steve Cauon. IDOT bear- 
ing officer. 

Thai did not sit wefl with residenU at the 
meeting. 

"This is outrageous," said Mary ReinhoM, a 
Monroe County resident. "They're not allowing 
us to ask questions in front of each other, about 
our own land. 

"I moved to the most inaccessible area I could 
Tmd just to get peace and quiet. I have an inten- 
tionally isolated llfotyle." 

Sherifrs deputies also were on hand to control 
the approxinwldy 45 officiak and residents at 

each presentation. 

IDOT has held similar meetings with the same 
format in otha towtu along the proposed high- 
way route. 

Information regarding costs, environmental 
impact, highwi^y construction and route altenu- 
tWes were prcacoted as part of an IDOT slide 
show. 



2744 



Exhibit 18b 



[From H T.Oct. 25, 1991] 



Plans for Proposed Highway Draw Fire at 

Public Hearing 



•r' 

H T Staff wmer 

The BloomliiKton-to^ Newberry leg 
of a new southwestern Indiana 
hiRhway will cost about $186 mil- 
lion to $415 million to build, an engl 
nrer told a s.jndlng room-only 
crowd at Grandview Elementary 
School Thursday evening. 

Those amounts would build a 32- 
mile, four lane freeway with three 
Interchanges, said Tom Cervone. 
from the Rvansvllle based engi- 
neering company Rernhardtn. 
Lochmueller & Associates. 

Indiana Department of Highways 
spokesman Don Shields said that 
road eventually could become part 
of a planned extension of Interstate 
09 from Indianapolis to Mexico. 

Rut state highway officials 
wouldn't answer questions from the 
crowd about the cost or any other 
aspect of the project, which led to 
frustration and occasional out- 
bursts from those attending. In- 
stead, they urged those in atten 
dance to write down their 
comments. 

"Nothing here Is drawn In con- 
crete." said Indiana Department of 
Highways hearing officer Steve Ca 
Iron. "We're not here to argue or 
debate with you. We're here to up 
date you." 

In response, one woman shouted. 
"You want to take our land, but you 
won't answer our questions." 

Calling that process "very unde- 
mocratic." Tom Tokarski from Citi- 
zens for Appropriate Rural Roads 
held his own question and answer 
session after Catron and the engi 
neers completed the R'st of three 
presentations. 

Tokarski and nnost of the crowd 
look exception to statements made 
by highway ofRclals and the engi 



neers about the Imparts the road 
would have on the environment 
and nearby towns along the route. 

David Isley. part-own«!r In the en- 
gineering firm, said the highway 
would be constructed in three 
phases: fhmi Bkwmington to Ind. S7 
at Newberry, from Newberry to Pe- 
tersburg, and from f*etersburg to 
Kvansville. 

lie said two f>f the four originally 
pn»posed mutes for the Blooming- 
on to- Newberry leg were eliminated 
lierause of economic and environ- 
mental pri»blems. Along with ttie 
two rvmaininK rniile*;. a third alter- 
native, that of not building a road, 
is also being evaluated, he said 

Hut Isley said rwt building a road 
would be costly. He cited studies 
that say the road would bring as 
many as 1.600 new jobs to the area 
and millions in economic beneRts. 

And he said improved safety on 
the roads could perhaps save as 
many as 3S0 lives over a SO-year pe- 
riod, a statement that drew laugh- 
ter from some. 

Cervone said crews this summer 
walked every inch of the two pro- 
posed routes to Newberry, both of 
which would traverse parts of 
southwestern Monroe County, and 
evaluated them for geological, eco- 
logical, archaeological and histori- 
cal impacts, as well as for issues of 
public concern such as proximity to 
schools. 

They believe the two preferred al- 
ternative routes offer the best bal- 
ance between environmental elTects 
and engineering standards. Cer- 
vone said. 

Rut Tokarski and others aaM the 
engineers and the odkials eltlier 
overlooked or misrepresented the 
proposed road's impact. 



2745 



Monroe County reiildeni Marti 
Crouch argued that conducting en 
vironmental studies on the highway 
one phase at a time is inadequate 
The impart or the entire road, not 
just the .12 miles from RIoominglon 
to Newberry, should be considered 
before any decisions are made, she 
said. 

Gary Hafher. a member of the 



Monroe County Plan Commission. 
saJd the only people who would ben- 
efit from the road are those at iU 
two ends. Indianapolis and 
Evansville. 

Tokaraki agreed. 

"The only people In favor of this 
are those who sUnd to gain money 
from it." he said. 



2746 



INTER AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO 

STATEMENT OF ESTELA LOPEZ, PH.D., VICE PRESIDENT FOR 

ACADEMIC AFFAIRS 

The Inter American Uruversity of Puerto Rico (lAUPR) and its Airway 
Science Program consider it a privilege to submit testimony to the Transportation 
Appropriations Subcommittee and greatly appreciate the opportunity to review the 
strides our University is making in the aviation education field. 

According to FAA Aviation Forecasts Report, aviation activities are expected 
to grow dramatically in the next ten years; aviation will continue to dominate all 
other transportation modes in the commercial intercity passenger market; and 
regional/commuter aircraft activity and the business use of general aviation are 
projected to experience growth. With the modernization of the National Airspace 
System, as well as the application of new computer technologies, air traffic 
controllers and new digital electrorucs personnel will require new and additional 
trairung. lAUPR is in a position to respond to these trends and national needs and 
to prepare people with essential skills for the safe functioning and managing of 
aviation operations and systems for future generatior^s. 

Inter American University of P uerto Rico 

lAUPR is the largest private uruversity in Puerto Rico and the second largest 
in the Western hemisphere, offering undergraduate, graduate and professional 
programs to approximately 42,500 students armually. Over 4,000 degrees, ranging 
from associate degrees to the professional and doctoral levels, are granted each year. 

With nine campuses on the Island, lAUPR is geared toward the development 
of programs and services directly related to job opportunities and human resources 
needs in both the public and private sectors, as well as the provision of a well 
rounded liberal education stressing high level intellectual skills. As part of the 
Uruversity's commitment to enhance the educational opportunities for Hispanic 
students, it has established associations with over seventeen leading Colleges and 
Universities in the U.S., Europe and the Caribbean. 

The University maintaii\s its responsiveness to the evolving educational 
needs of society, adjusting its academic programs to match its own particular 
mission and the needs of the surrounding communities. The University's tradition 
of commuruty service, the geographical location of its instructional uruts and its 
unwavering attention to student needs make it especially attractive and accessible to 
students of limited economic means. 

Airway Science Program 

Established in 1985, the Airway Science Program, with its state-of-the-art 
instructional equipment and facilities, is designed to better prepjire young men and 



2747 



women for critical administrative, technical and management positior« in the 
aviation industry. Our Program now educates over 50% of the minority students 
eiuolled in airway science programs throughout the U.S. 

Located on lAUPR's Bayamon Campus, the Airway Science Program offers 
Bachelor of Science degrees in four specialization areas approved by the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA): 1) Airway Science Management; 2) Airway 
Electronic Systems; 3) Airway Computer Science, and 4) Aircraft Systems 
Management. Our new facility at the Isla Grande Airport provides seven 
classrooms, a conference room, computer and electronics laboratories, a 
meteorology laboratory, and flight and air traffic control simulation laboratories. It 
also includes a propulsion laboratory (engines), aviation electronic equipment 
laboratory, avionics, aircraft structures and hydraulic systems. A hangar of 10,000 
square feet for aircraft maintenance is also part of the facilities. Since 1990, access to 
all lAUPR system libraries is made possible through 9 computer terminals, which 
are served by an on-line DOBIS/LEUVEN system connected to the Technical 
Processing Center located at the Metropolitan Campus. 

During the last four years, we have developed competent aviation 
professionals to occupy technical and administrative positions with the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA), American Airlines and American Eagle; 
developed effective teaching methods and courses (approved by the FAA), 
particularly for the Flight Program; provided continuing education programs and 
workshops on aerospace education and flight safety to professors, flight ir\structors, 
and pilots; and received FAA approval for the ground school courses and 
certification for the Pilot Ground School. 

The strengths of our aviation program are many: an experienced faculty, a 
rigorous curriculum, and a demonstrated competence in the teaching of critically 
needed professionals. The Airway Science Program meets the national need by 
educating students in math, science, and computer technology; preparing qualified 
teachers to teach Aviation and Avionics to meet the needs of colleges, universities 
and high schools; providing opportunities for disadvantaged students; and creating 
life-long learrung opportunities. 

As we mentioned, the demand for highly trained air, ground, space, 
management and technical persormel in the aviation industries is continuing to 
grow. Specialized programs such as ours will serve as the foundation for educating 
the highly skilled human resources necessary to maintain our historical position as 
the world's leader in aviation and aviation-related industries. 

Our Commitment to the Community 

Access to education is a major issue in our society especially in the 
environment of rising costs and the reversal of federal and state revenues to private 
colleges and universities. lAUPR's mission is to provide access and opporturuty to 



2748 



higher education to ail individuals, thereby, assuring that the cultural diversity of 
its student body compares to that of the nation. Clearly, disadvantaged students 
need access to aviation education. Moreover, the community as a whole needs the 
Uruversity to provide both access and success of all segments of the population, as 
well as to underscore the many career opporturuties in aviation, transportation and 
related fields. 

Virtually all Inter American University students are Hispanic-American 
residents of Puerto Rico who belong to low income households. A majority of the 
parents of Pell Grant recipients (over 80%) can only pay between 2.4% and 12% of 
the $4,170 Pell Grant average cost. The unemployment rate of 16 to 24 year olds on 
the Island is 30.4%. Although additional student aid is necessary, lAUPR's 
outstanding record of providing scholarships, federal- and state-funded financial 
assistance programs (grants and loans) and a wide array of academic programs has 
enabled this segment of the population to receive a substantive and meaningful 
education and will certainly make a difference to our nation and regiorv 

In addition to its direct educational contributions, lAUPR has contributed to 
the economic productivity, social capability and progress of the Puerto Rican 
community. lAUPR's activity has generated approximately 5,700 jobs for the Puerto 
Rican economy over the last five years, including jobs in operations (faculty and 
non-faculty), construction, and the external employment market. The University 
also owns lands and buildings valued at $124.6 million which, if used as collateral, 
are potentially available to help finance economic enterprises. 

Looking to the Future - Maintaining and Meeting Additional Program Needs 

As with most private institutions, the most pressing financial problem faced 
by the University is its high dependency on tuition-based income. The direction the 
University will follow depends upon its ability to curtail this high dependency and 
to diversify its revenue base so that it may have sufficient funds for continued 
growth. Another concern is the tremendous increase in operational costs that result 
from rising ir\flation, high competition, and new federal regulations. With respect 
to the Airway Science Program, these rising costs could have a significant impact on 
our future plar\s, which include: 

• Creating and developing methods of scientific investigation in the field of 
aviation with the purpose of improving safety and a better admirustration of 
aviation enterprises; 

• Developing a program towards the Master's Degree in Airway Science 
Management; 

• Developing a school of aeronautics in order to provide training and flight 
instruction; and 



2749 



• Designing a new Aviation Maintenance Technology Program. 

The University has previously received two grants, to which lAUPR 
provided a 50% match. Outside of this federal assistance, we have wholly funded, 
through tuition revenue and private contributions, the establishment and 
operation of the Airway Science Program, including the coristruction of its facilities, 
the purchase of equipment and educational materials, and the financing of 
operating and personnel costs, to name a few. Our exceptional collection of 
technical and specialized programs are costly and require substantial investments in 
equipment and laboratories. Furthermore, the development of new technologies 
requires frequent equipment enhancement in order to familiarize students with the 
latest technological advancements. In order to ensure that students are receiving 
the education necessary to successfully contribute to the aviation industry, some 
federal assistance is needed. For FY 1994, the Uruversity needs approximately 
$1,610,000 to purchase flight training, classroom and aircraft maintenance 
equipment, and equipment for our Aviation Electronics Laboratory (see attached list 
for a breakdown of specific equipment needs). The Uruversity is committed to make 
the financial contribution necessary to meet our local match. This much needed 
equipment will enable us to maintain, as well as expand upon, our aviation 
education program in an efficient and effective marmer. It will also enable us to 
continue our current curriculum and training, while at the same time pursue our 
future expansion needs. 

Conclusion 

lAUPR has the ability to respond to the national need and to identify 
elements in training and education that are essential to the safe functioning of the 
airspace industry system today and in the future. As we continue our mission in 
these areas, we realize that the future success and growth of our program cannot be 
accomplished independentiy. By assisting LAUPR, you would create a partnership 
between the federal government, the University, and the aviation industry to 
continue viable career paths to fill a well documented manpower need, as well as 
assist the nation in meeting the aviation challenges of the 21st century. Your 
$1,610,000 investment for our equipment needs will go far in improving the 
aviation education available in Puerto Rico, and will enable us to undertake our 
other expansion efforts in a timely manner. The LAUPR Airway Science Program 
provides the opporturuty to take a reasonable, practical and cost effective approach 
to addressing our growing aviation needs. In addition, lAUPR will be able to 
continue to address the economic and social needs of a significantly disadvantaged 
community. 



2750 



JACKSONVILLE, FL 

JACKSONVILLE TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 

STATEMENT OF MILES N. FRANCIS, JR., EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

TO: Members of the Senate Subcommittee on Transportation 

It is important for this Subcommittee to understand the history of 
the Automated Skyway Express project, particularly with regard to 
the piecemeal approval and funding that marked the development of 
this project. Planning began in 1976, and the project's review and 
approval proceeded through the Urban Mass Transportation Adminis- 
tration as part of the "downtown people mover" demonstration 
program. 

Just as the planning and project approval process for this 2.5 mile 
system was coming to a successful conclusion under the direction of 
the Carter Administration, the Reagan Administration came into 
being and immediately introduced a very different Executive Branch 
policy on Federal participation in mass transit programs. Among 
the Reagan Administration initiatives was the elimination of 
Federal effort to develop downtown people movers. Due to the 
momentum that three projects had nationwide, including ours in 
Jacksonville, the Congress decided to proceed with the these three 
projects in the face of strong opposition from the Reagan Adminis- 
tration. At the same time, we were coping with other Reagan 
initiatives to drastically reduce overall levels of Federal funding 
for mass transit. This resulted in a severe restriction of Federal 
funding resources which, coupled with the vociferous Administration 
opposition to continuing the downtown people mover program, made 
negotiation with the Administration on moving forward with the 
Jacksonville people mover a most difficult task. 

As a result, our Automated Skyway Express was divided into funding 
and construction phases which have, in turn, resulted in a most 
undesirable development plan for the Jacksonville project. The 
Reagan Administration finally agreed, under strong pressure from 
this Committee, to execute a full funding agreement for a .7 mile 
"starter system" in 1984. This first phase, designated "Phase lA", 
opened to revenue service on June 5, 1989. Since that time we have 
proceeded with planning additional segments to complete the full 
2.5 mile system. This Subcommittee has continued to earmark 
Section 3 discretionary funds to the project, and we are pleased to 
note the cooperative atmosphere which developed at the Federal 
Transit Administration during the last year of the Bush Administra- 
tion with even more favorable emphasis from the Clinton Administra- 
tion. As a result, we are in final negotiations with the FTA for 
a full funding grant agreement which will reflect the authorized 
funding level for the project as contained in the Intermodal 
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) , of $71.2 
million for the 1.8 mile "extension" (i.e., completion) of the 
Automated Skyway Express. 

Through Federal funding, we have completed and are operating the 
first segment (Phase lA) and the second segment (Phase IB North 
Leg) is under construction. You have also appropriated $15 million 
toward the third segment (Phase IB River Crossing Leg) . 

We are before you today requesting additional funding for the third 
and final river crossing segment of a 2.5 mile system. The bridge 
that will accommodate this segment is already under construction 
and will provide the platforms to accommodate the running pads for 



2751 



the Skyway vehicles. Already completed, are the pier foundations 
at the south end of the new bridge and the northbound platform. 

This segment will service substantial hospital and insurance 
employment centers allowing convenient movement between the two 
banks of the St. Johns River. Only with the completion of this 
final segment can the project's full benefit be realized. 

The Federal government, through a series of grants and full funding 
agreements, has funded this project to a current level of $74.6 
million. This funding includes (see Attachment 1, aerial photo) : 

The construction of the first segment - Phase lA - $26.8 
million (in purple on aerial photo) . 

A grant for $3.9 million - Phase IB design services. 

The transferral from FTA (UMTA) of $7 million to FHWA for the 
construction of guideway platforms on the new Acosta Bridge 
(third segment river crossing) now under construction (in 
silver on aerial photo) . 

An allocation, through a current FTA full funding agreement, 
of $28.8 million for the construction of the second segment 
north leg. Phase IB (in green on aerial photo) . 

Congressional appropriation of $5.1 million in FY92 for the 
construction of the third segment, river crossing, of Phase IB 
(in pink on aerial photo). 

Congressional appropriation of $10.0 million in FY93 for the 
construction of the third segment, river crossing, of Phase IB 
(in pink on aerial photo). 

The most unfortunate aspect of this piecemeal approach to funding 
and constructing our downtown people mover project is that, like 
constructing a house or any type of civil construction on a room- 
by-room or section-by-section basis, we have lost certain economies 
of scale by having to divide the project, and hence the civil 
construction and equipment procurement work, into segments. Rather 
than being able to bring project design, construction and equipment 
suppliers in to bid on the entire 2.5 mile system, we were forced 
in 1984 to seek bids on the .7 mile starter system, and later, on 
an additional .6 mile North Leg Extension that takes the Automated 
Skyway Express completely through the downtown area on the north 
bank of the St. Johns River to the Florida Community College 
campus . 

While we have unquestionably lost project budget economies by being 
forced into less than optimal design, construction and procurement 
contracts, we have also suffered from the disadvantages of having 
only .7 miles of an intended 2.5 mile project in revenue service. 
While UMTA officials in 1984 may have viewed this .7 miles as an 
"operable segment", the resulting ridership from this initially 
truncated project provided service to few people in the downtown 
area due to its short length. It did not have the capability of 
accommodating many of the trips that occur in the downtown area. 
In addition, development downtown was in areas not served by the 
starter line. The .7 mile segment provides access to a very 
limited number of trip origin and destination points, and connects 
a very limited number of major trip generators. 

We are requesting that $56.2 million be appropriated to this 
project for FY94. This is in addition to $15.1 million previously 
appropriated, which added together, would total $71.2 million 
thereby complying with the ISTEA legislation (Attachments 2 and 3) . 
This funding will allow for construction to continue across the St. 



2752 



Johns River to the first station in the south bank area. It will 
also fund all the vehicles required for the operation of the total 
system. 

As reflected in Attachment 4, the benefits of the project to the 
community are significant. The construction of the second segment 
alone (north leg, Including a bus/skyway transfer facility. Attach- 
ment 5, which is fully funded and under construction) will result 
in 1,348 new project-related jobs at a payroll of $26.2 million, 
with a local economic impact of $78.4 million, a regional economic 
impact of $81.6 million and a national economic impact of $122.9 
million. 

The total economic impact, including both segments, north leg and 
river crossing, become even more significant. They will result in 
4,693 new project-related jobs with a payroll of $91.3 million, a 
local economic impact of $274.8 million, a regional economic impact 
of $284.3 million and a national economic impact of $429.8 million. 

The cost effectiveness of this project can be found in several 
areas. Our most recent financial plan, which has been approved by 
FTA, shows break-even operation by 1998, when the system at its 
full 2.5 mile configuration will accommodate 19,000 passengers per 
weekday . 

The Skyway project, in its completed form (2.5 miles of guideway, 
9 stations and 14 vehicles) , will become an integral part of 
Jacksonville's mass transit system. It will allow easy, convenient 
(two-minute headways) access into our downtown area, which is 
particularly important because of the St. Johns River bisecting our 
core city. By utilizing its elevated guideway structure, it will 
not conflict with any of the downtown vehicular and pedestrian 
traffic. It will also provide for approximately 5,000 additional 
parking spaces in and around the downtown area, thereby providing 
a built-in cliental for the Skyway. This is currently being done 
(approximately 800 parking spaces) very successfully, with our 
completed first segment. 

The Skyway is part of a we 11 -developed transportation plan for our 
community. One that has been subject to extensive review by the 
City Council, the Mayor, the Chamber of Commerce, the Florida 
Department of Transportation and the Federal Transit Administra- 
tion, as well as this Committee. It has broad support throughout 
our community. 

The project, to date, has had minimal impact on downtown travel 
patterns with the result that we have been able to accrue few 
mobility and congestion mitigation benefits to the project to date. 
Additionally, we have not been able to realize the operational 
benefits that are expected to materialize when the 2.5 mile system 
is completed. This includes the ability to remove buses from 
downtown streets and to shorten individual bus trip running time. 
The time saved will be used to make more runs and thus increase 
service frequencies on bus routes leading to the downtown area. 
This frees buses from existing schedules and routes, increasing 
suburban service. The CBD fringe parking areas which we have 
established and maintained in anticipation of the completion of the 
Skyway will finally be fully utilized, thus providing further 
vehicular congestion and air pollution mitigation in the downtown 
area. 

The Jacksonville Transportation Authority and the City of Jackson- 
ville, appreciate the Congress and the Administration's efforts in 
providing stimulus funding to restore a more balanced role for 
transit. We have faced a long step-by-step struggle to get where 
we are today. We have moved forward with numerous small amounts of 
funding, constructing this system segment by segment. We are very 
appreciative of the fact that two-thirds of this project is fully 
funded, because of this Committee's support. We are determined to 
complete this project, thereby allowing the future transportation 
plans of this community to be carried out. 

Your continued support is necessary and appreciated. 



2753 



Attachment 2 

the locally preferred alternative for a S.J mile extension of the North 
Line of the heavy rail rapid transit system in Atlanta, Georgia. 

(uu) HovsTos Priority Corridor Fixed Gvideway Project. — 
Provided that a locally preferred alternative for the Priority Corri- 
dor fixed guideway project has been selected by March J. J 992, no 
later than April JO, 1992, the Secretary shall negotiate and sign a 
mulliyear grant agreement with the Metropolitan Transit Authority 
of Harris County which includes S500.000.000 from funds made 
available under section 3(kXlXB) of the Federal Transit Act 
tojearry out the construction of such locally preferred alternative, 
^"^(vvj Jacksonville Automated Skyway Express Extension.— No 
later than April SO, 1992, the Secretary shall negotiate and sign a 
multiyear grant agreement with the Jacksonville Transportation 
Authority which includes $71.2 million from funds made available 
under section S(kXlXB) of the Federal Transit Act to carry 
.out the construction of the locally preferred alternative for a 1.8 
\mile extension to the Automated Skyway Express starter line. 
\(ww) Honolulu Rapid T^iansit Project. — No later than April 
SO^ 1992, the Secretary shall negotiate and sign a multiyear grant 
agreement with the City and Q)unty of Honolulu which includes 
$618,000,000 from funds made available under section SfkXlXB) of 
the Federal Transit Act to carry out the construction of the 
locally preferred alternative of a 17.S mile fixed guideway system, 
(xx) Sacramento Light Rail Project.-— No later than April SO, 
1992, the Secretary shall negotiate and sign a multiyear grant agree- 
ment with the Sacramento Regional Transit District which in- 
cludes, from funds made available under section SfkXlXB) of the 
Federal Transit Act $26,000,000 to provide for the comple- 
tion of alternatives analysis, preliminary engineering, and final 
design on proposed extensions to the light rail system in Sacramen- 
to, California. 

(yy) Philadelphia Cross-County Metro Rail Project.— No 
later than April SO, 1992, the Secretary shall negotiate and sign a 
multiyear grant agreement with the Southeastern Pennsylvania 
Transportation Authority which includes, from funds made avail- 
able under section S(kXlXB) of the Federal Transit Act $2,400,000 to 
provide for the completion of alternatives analysis and preliminary 
engineering for the Philadelphia Cross-County Metro Rail Project. 

(zz) Cleveland Blue Line Light Rail Extension.— No later 
than April SO, 1992, the Secretary shall negotiate and sign a mul- 
tiyear grant agreement with the Greater Cleveland Regional TVansit 
Authority which includes, from funds made available under section 
S(kXlXB) of the Federal Transit Act of 1964. $1,200,000 to provide 
for the completion of alternatives analysis and preliminary engi- 
neering for an extension of the Blue Line to Highland Hills, Ohio, 
(aaa) DuLLES Corridor Rail Project.— No later than April SO, 
1992, the Secretary shall negotiate and sign a multiyear grant agree- 
ment with the State of Virginia, or its assignee, which includes, 
from funds made available under section S(kXlXB) of the Federal 
Transit Act, $6,000,000 to provide for the completion of al- 
ternatives analysis and preliminary engineering for a rail corridor 
from the West Falls Church Washington Metropolitan Area Transit 
Authority rail station to Dulles International Airport. 



•7c_CQ"a r> _ OA — 1 1 



2754 



Attachment 3 

JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA 

AUTOMATED SKYWAY EXPRESS 

TRANSIT SYSTEM 

JACKSONVILLE TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 

Phase I-B : includes 1.8 mile dual guideway System which consists of 6 additional stations, 12 additional 
vehicles, a vehicle maintenance facility and construction of 1.8 miles of guideway. This project also includes 
joint use of the new Acosia Bridge, an FHWA/UMTA project, which is under construction. Environmental 
Impact Statement documents were approved for this project in 1984. 

Previous Allocation FY '90 & '91 - Funds the construction of the system's north segment*, includ- 
ing 0.6 miles of dual guideway, two additional stations and vehicles, and will extend from the Central Station 
(currently in use) to the Florida Community College at Jacksonville (FCCJ) downtown campus. Also, provided 
are funds for construction of seven foundations on the south bank of the St. Johns River, as a part of the river 
crossing segment, which are adjacent to the new Acosta Bridge (currently under construction). A major bus 
interface will be constructed at the FCCJ Station and park and ride facilities will be available. 

Previous Appropriation FY '92 - Funds appropriated ($5.1 million) will complete the fmal design 
of the remainder of the 2.5 mile system north of the river and purchase right of way. 

Previous Appropriation FY '93 - Funds appropriated ($10.0 million) will complete all right-of-way 
acquisition for the entire 2.5 mile system. Construction would proceed for the guideway from the turn out at 
Bay and Broad streets south to the new Acosta Bridge to meet the river crossing guideway already under 
construction. Also, the guideway link to the Central Maintenance and Control Center (CMS A) would be 
constructed. 

Proposed Appropriation FY '94 - Funds ($56.0 million) would complete construction of the 
guideway across the St. Johns River including the San Marco Boulevard Station on the southbank and the 
completion of the CMSA structure. Vehicles would be purchased and automated train control installed on the 
guideway and in station. The Central control for the full system would be installed in the CMSA site along 
with appropriate vehicle maintenance equipment. 

Funding Required (miilions) 

Second Segment Third Segment 

North Leg River Crossing Current 

Previous Funding FY 92 FY 93 FY 94 Avthori^HiPO 

FEDERAL (FTA) 28.8 S.l 10.0 S6.1 71.2 

STATE 4.8 .6 1.2 7.0 8.8 

LOCAL 4.8 t4 1.2 7.0 8.8 

38.4* C.3 12.4 70.1 88.8 

■Currently under eonstruetlon 



2755 



m 



_ 0) 

4-' (U 

O £ 

H Q. 



c 




o 


E 


M 


1^ 


c 




ra 


CO 


Q. 


CO 


X 


^ 


UJ 


-o> 



X) = 

•2. 1 

CO CO 



c c c 

° ~ -2 

111 

00 CO CM 

^' Tt CO 

r^ 00 o 

CM CM ^ 



m 



0) 

c 



x: o 
Q. Z 













c 






c 


c 


c 


o 






o 


o 


g 






Vi 










c 


Si 


•= 


^z 


^ 


E 

Cvj 


•2 p 


.o 

CO 


E 

(M 


E 


E 

(O 


SS2 


CO 


CO 


00 






X CO 


CM 


r^ 


00 




UJ ■*/> 


«~ 


■«> 


«> 


■«> 


<» 






u 

•p 



o 

(0 

a 
E 



E 
o 

c 
o 
u 

UJ 
(0 



5 



* CM 
•- 00 

CO o 



in ID CM 

m CM in 

q '-^ o 

CM CM CO 



c: 
a> 

E 

o 
ci 

E 

UJ 



M 

c 



(0 
UJ 



o 

(D 

a 
E 



o 

c 
o 
o 

Ul 

"(5 
u 
o 



u 
ra 
a 

E 

u 

1 
o 

c 
o 
u 



u 
a 

E 

u 

E 
o 

c 
o 
u 



UJ LLJ 



i- Q. 

Q. O 



(0 

c 
o 
'6) 



(0 

c 
g 

z 





•o 
c 








■o 

8 






re 

E 
o 

■D 




^4 
1 












•o 




E 






"5 




c 
re 

E 










o 




a> 




u 






*j 




■o 




lU 






T3 




re 




• 










.c 




{£ 






> 




«»i 




o 






1 




2 




E 






4-« 




■o 




o 






3 




o 




U 






& 
o 




> 

•s 




•8 






t 






5 






w 




*^ 




g 






re 




3 




♦^ 






o 
■o 




t 

o 




1 






re 




«^ 




o 






c 
o 




o 




(A 






2 




re 




Z) 






■o 














TJ 




o 




• 






re 




•a 














re 




>■ 


V) 




re 




c 


uL 


^ 


M 




» 




o 


Z 


■o 


^ 




w 




]c 


3 


o 


re 




O 




^ 




£ 


c 








re 


o 


u> 


< 




o 






^^ 


Z 


o 




■c 




jl 


c 


3 


E 




*-» 




u 


a> 


a 




V) 

3 

■a 




re 




I 


o 

c 
o 




c 




O 


ra 

a. 


w 


o 

UJ 




"re 
1 




(0 


a> 
O 

M 
U 


oc 
o 


o 

3 

re 




•a 
o 




M 

3 

■o 


1 

o 

c 
o 


s 


£ 

3 

m 




a. 
E 




re 


u 

lU 


■D 

c 


0» 

u 




4) 






e 


re 


0) 




o 


Jr 


S 


■s 


I 


E 
E 
o 
U 




£ 


♦i 


3 




u> 




O 


M 


U 


V) 


3 






3 


U 


"2 




.| 






■a 


o 


o 


10 


o 






c 




o 


!k 






O 


c 
o 


•S g 


$ 
J 


Q. 


c 
E 




M 


o 


»- -o 


"J 


3 


c 




O 




3 C 


_i 


2 


re 




C 


c 

8 

a 
c 


Q. — 


^ 


a 




E 

re 
o> 

c 




Q. 

& 
C 
3 
O 


re 

1.1 


Q 




a 


6 


re o 
re T3 


CJ 


■ « 


> 




c 
re 

£ 
U 

re 


§ 

a. 

i 


"re 

> 

3 

Q 


"I 
- E 

o < 


•D 
O 
TJ 
> 




1 


8 


"o a 


a 




s 

a. 






e 


M 


h. 


w *-» 


^ 




2-S 


2 £ 


s 


o .<2 


o 

»4 


M 


,21 


o o 


.2 


o re 

re «-' 


u 

re 
u. 


a> 














«-» 














o 














H 


^ 




r>j 


ri 


ri 


in 



2756 



LOS ANGELES, CA 

LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION 

AUTHORITY 

STATEMENT OF RICHARD ALATORRE. MEMBER, LOS ANGELES 
CITY COUNCIL AND CHAIRMAN 

Mr. Chairman: 

On behalf of the newly formed Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 
(MTA), the successor agency to the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission, the 
Southern California Rapid Transit District, and the Rail Construction Corporation, I am 
pleased to introduce our panel testifying to request funding for Los Angeles County 
transportation programs and projects for the 1994 Fiscal Year. 

Let me first bring the warm regards and sincere appreciation of Mayor Tom Bradley for the 
outstanding work which you and Members of this Subcommittee have done to advance 
transportation in Los Angeles. As Mayor Tom Bradley retires, he leaves a legacy of 
outstanding public service and support for building a regional network of public mass 
transportation. 

We are pleased to have the enthusiastic support of our Congressional Delegation from 
Southern California. The leadership of Representatives Julian Dixon, Esteban Torres, David 
Dreier, Lucille Roybal-Allard, and Jerry Lewis, have been a cornerstone of the success Los 
Angeles has achieved. We are pleased to have our new Senator from California, Dianne 
Feinstein, with us today in support of funding for the critical programs under construction in 
Los Angeles. 

We are pleased by the attention the Administration has given to Los Angeles, especially by 
Secretaries Brown and Pena. While touring our construction sites during his visit to Los 
Angeles in March, Secretary Pena remarked that creative programs start at the local level 
more often than in Washington. He was able to assess our creativity, enthusiasm, and the 
local financial support that makes up our commitment to public transportation as an 
encouragement to growth. 

We are joined today by my colleagues, Ray Remy, who is President of the Los Angeles Area 
Chamber of Commerce, and alternate of Mayor Bradley on the MTA Board; Ron Lamb, 
Executive Director of the Greater Los Angeles Transportation Coalition, representing the 
business community; and Franklin White, Chief Executive Officer of the MTA. 

My testimony addresses the multifaceted transportation funding issues which effect Los 
Angeles County, including Metro Rail, the Gateway Intermodal Transit Center at Union 
Station, funding programs under the ISTEA legislation, maintenance of operating assistance, 
and federal highway demonstration projects. 

Metro Red Line 

In 1980, this subcommittee provided the first federal funds for the design of the Metro Red 
Line, Los Angeles' first subway. Los Angeles citizens enthusiastically celebrated the 
opening of the first 4.4 miles of the Metro Red Line on January 30, 1993. Red Line 
ridership continues to exceed expectations and businesses along the route have seen a 
increase in customers. 

Construction of the Metro Red Line will not only enhance mobility for commuters, but also 
provide joint development and other crucial economic opportunities at station sites and along 



2757 



the transit corridor. This type of investment will positively impact the construction of 
housing and other neighborhood amenities. 

Segment 2 

_The MTA has made dramatic progress on the second segment of the Red Line. The design 
is 80 percent complete and construction is roughly 20 percent finished. The 
Wilshire/Westem extension will open in 1996, followed by the Hollywood segment in 1998. 
Since June 1991, we have created over 4,000 jobs on this project and by its completion, over 
4 1,900 jobs will have been created. Investments in mass transit promote the nation's goals 
of cleaner air and accessibility. It helps reduce our dependence on foreign oil while the 
economic impact provides new jobs for our citizens. 

Segment 3 

As you know Segment 3 was specifically authorized by Congress in 1991 in the Intermodal 
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act. Segment 3 will extend Metro Rail to: 

o East Los Angeles for the first time, providing much needed rail transit to 

communities that have long supported and used public transit; 

o North Hollywood, enabling residents of the San Fernando Valley to commute 

quickly downtown; and 

o Mid-City area, ensuring that Metro Rail has an effective interim terminus at 

Pico/San Vicente which can serve the westside until Metro Rail is extended 
west. 

We are requesting $190 million in Section 3 funding for Metro Red Line with $70 million 
for segment 2 and $120 million, $40 million each for the Eastside, North Hollywood, and 
Mid-City extensions. Our 1994 funding request is a balance which will allow us to complete 
the federal funding share of $667 million, 46%, for Segment 2, while moving aggressively 
with all three elements of Segment 3. 

The Federal Transit Administration made reallocations from the New Start Rail Funding 
from those levels approved by Congress in the FY 1993 bill. We understand this reduction 
was as much a surprise to Members of this Subcommittee as it was to the citizens of Los 
Angeles. 

We understand that the earmarks will be set in statute, rather than report language for 1994. 
We hope this Subcommittee will take the 1993 decrease of federal New Starts funding into 
account by providing an increase in 1994 in order for the MTA to continue its ambitious and 
economically-beneficial schedule. 



Gateway Intermodal Transit Center at Union Station 



The Gateway Intermodal Transit Center will be the regional hub for the largest single 
investment in urban transit nationally. Connecting the five counties of Los Angeles, Orange, 
Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura, the Transit Center will truly define the meaning of 
intermodalism. Accommodating 100 buses every hour and more than 1 14,000 passengers 
each day, the Intermodal Center will provide easy connections for commuters using Metro 
Rail, AMTRAK, Metrolink, the Blue Line to Pasadena light-rail line, the El Monte Busway, 
regional and local bus service, and van, car pool and taxi services. The Center will make it 
more convenient to utilize mass transit in all forms. 



2758 



While on the construction site of the Intermodal Transit Center, Secretary Peiia stressed the 
enhanced beneFits coming to the region from projects that are intermodal and central in 
nature. He mentioned that projects like Gateway increase the speed, reliability and cost- 
effectiveness of the transportation sector while playing a key role in assuring the regions 
economic competitiveness and ability to create jobs. The Gateway Intermodal Transit Center 
at historic Union Station in Los Angeles meets that defmition with every criteria. 

For the first time, aU of the various modes of transportation will converge at one central 
point. The Gateway project is an unprecedented joint development public-private partnership 
which can stimulate the economic revitalization of the eastside of downtown Los Angeles, as 
well as a catalyst for expanding economic markets at El Pueblo, Little Tokyo, and 
Chinatown. 

Gateway, is a joint development project between the MTA and Catellus Development 
Corporation. Joint development will provide easement rights and access over the remaining 
Catellus property. And, private investment in the project will exceed $10 million. 

The Transit Center is one of eleven projects currently being considered for a Federal Transit 
Administration National Turnkey Demonstration Program. 

Our FY 1994 appropriation request is for $18 million to continue federal support for 
construction of the Center. The FY 1993 appropriation of $12.75 million allowed the MTA 
to break ground and begin construction in January 1993 on this $149.5 million project, 
creating over 350 jobs immediately. This project is expected to create over 4,000 
construction jobs over a three-year period with more than 2,500 permanent job opportunities 
in the offices, retail stores, and businesses located at the facility. We have aggressively 
pursued a model MBE/WBE program, and a job-training component is under development. 



Los Angeles County's Commitment to Mass Transit 



The MTA asks for your continued support to assist operators in carrying out the mandates of 
Congress that were set forth in the ISTEA. 

Congress has asked transit to reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil, clean our air by 
making a further reduction in tailpipe emissions, improve accessible service, and provide 
increased transportation services. Los Angels County answered Congress's call with 
enthusiasm. 

MTA operates Ihg most cost-efficient major bus system in the United States, carrying each 
passenger at an average cost of 21 cents per mile, according to 1991 national data. As 
MTA's rail network expands, the need for buses to act as an effective feeder system is 
expected to grow from the current peak fleet of 2,000 to nearly 4,000 within the next 30 
years. 

Today, MTA buses carry more than 1.3 million passengers, every day and 416 million each 
year on 205 routes covering 326,337 miles. Our service area is one of the largest in the 
United States, covering 1,442 square miles that include four counties. MTA passengers can 
board a bus at any of approximately 19,650 bus stops throughout the region. 

MTA continues to operate some of the most crowded buses in the country, carrying an 
average of 18.4 riders at any given time on one of its buses. The average passenger load is 
43% over the average of its peers, and 13% higher than the number two transit operator, 
Detroit's Department of Transportation. This underscores the continuing need for more 
public transportation for the Los Angeles County area. 



2759 



The rest of the country is just beginning to comply with the new Americans with Disabilities 
Act (ADA) requiring wheelchair lifts on all public transit vehicles. MTA's bus fleet is 
already 93 percent accessible to our riders in wheelchairs, with 100 percent accessibility 
expected by 1997. Rail and bus facilities are 100% accessible and all new design and 
construction, including Metro Rail, have easy access. With paratransit vans in service, it is 
estimated that the ADA commitment wilFcost Los Angeles County approximately $60 
million per year to fully comply with Congress' mandate. 

While MTA provides the majority of bus service in Los Angeles County, the creation of 
other operators reflects the rise in demand for public transportation. There are now 17 
operators receiving regional funds in Los Angeles County. 

The MTA also operates the Metro Blue Line light rail and the Metro Red Line subway 
systems. The Blue Line is a north-south route stretching 22 miles and serving 22 stations 
from downtown Los Angeles, at its northernmost point, to downtown Long Beach. 
Traversing through the communities of Lynwood, Compton, Carson, and Watts the Blue 
Line averages about 38,000 passengers each weekday. 

The first 4.4-mile section of the Red Line, opened on January 30, 1993, and serves more 
than 13,000 riders each weekday from five downtown stations. In just three short months, 
the Red Line has already carried nearly one and one-half million riders. 

The Green Line, which will serve an east-west route from Los Angeles International Airport 
to Norwalk, is scheduled to begin operation in late 1994. This locally funded light-rail line 
will run down the center median of the Glenn Anderson Freeway and serve the high-tech 
centers in El Segundo and provide an easy connection to the Blue Line. 

The MTA has boldly embraced President Clinton's Defense Technology Reinvestment 
Project (TRP) with several programs aimed at transitioning aerospace/defense companies into 
the emerging surface transportation industry. 

A key defense technology reinvestment project on which the future of bus manufacturing may 
hinge is MTA's Advanced Technology Transit Bus (ATTB), also known as the "Stealth 
Bus." 

It earned this whimsical title because the material with which future buses could be made is 
the same used in the B-2 Stealth Bomber made by the Northrop Corporation. The MTA was 
recently awarded a Federal Transit Administration (FTA), section 26(b) R&D grant of $4 
million with $798,000 local match from Prop. C, for Phase I (Conceptual Design) to 
research the feasibility of building lightweight, low-floor, low emissions buses. As a result, 
Northrop, along with a national coalition of sub-contractors such as, Hughes, Transportation 
Manufacturing Corporation (TMC), Detroit Diesel, FMC Corporation, and Allison 
Transmission Division, and others, was awarded a $3.8 million contract in January of this 
year for Phase 1. 

If the project proves successful, it could mean much more efficiently- run, low-emissions 
buses, as well as an entirely new job base in an area still feeling the effects of a stubborn 
recession. 

Additionally, the MTA has issued a request for proposal to build 87 light-rail vehicles, 
known as the "L.A. Car", which, for the first time in a bid procurement, provided the 
opportunity for four international rail car builders to team with six aerospace/defense 
companies to bid on the L.A. Car. The high-tech companies include, AAI, Hughes, 
Lockheed, Northrop Corporation, Rockwell, and TRW. The procurement calls for the 
research and development of at least three advanced transit products. To support that 
endeavor, the MTA will provide up to $10 million in R&D resources to the winning team. 



2760 



Also on the horizon are experiments with phosphoric acid fuel cells, which, if applied to 
buses successfully, could virtually eliminate the emissions that contribute to Los Angeles' 
infamous smog condition. In October 1992, the MTA was chosen by the United States 
Department of Energy (DoE) to be the first public transportation agency to test fuel cells in 
buses. The first test bus is scheduled to arrive in Los Angeles in early 1994. 

The MTA leads the country in the development of alternatively fueled public transit vehicles. 
It is the only operator to successfully place alternatively fueled buses in revenue service and 
achieve standards comparable to diesel. Our commitment put Los Angeles on the cutting 
edge of technology. One half of all the alternatively fueled public transit vehicles in the 
country are in service on the streets of Los Angeles. 

The voters of Los Angeles County, at every opportunity, approved measures to make a 
substantial commitment to mass transit. In 1980, voters approved Proposition A, Los 
Angeles County's half-cent sales tax measure for public transportation. This tax currently 
raises approximately $400 million per year for bus and rail projects. In 1990, Los Angeles 
County voters approved another half-cent sales tax measure. Proposition C. Effective in 
April 1991, Prop C raises neariy $400 million a year. Funding from this measure has 
provided resources for myriad of transportation programs, including the successful Metro 
Freeway Service Patrol, expanded call box services, commuter rail and increased security. 

Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act 



The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) took giant strides toward 
putting mass transit on a level playing field with highways. This Subcommittee has the 
opportunity to continue that trend by funding mass transit at the authorized levels of ISTEA, 
$5.2 billion for FY 1994. Transit is ready to take on an expanded role in our national 
transportation system. 

We applaud the Administration's efforts to fund ISTEA programs at higher levels than FY 
1993 and join Congressman Norman Mineta in his call to provide 100 percent funding for 
both transit and highway programs at their fully authorized levels. 

Recognizing the growing need for local areas and states to set individualized priorities for 
their federal transportation funds, the ISTEA includes $58 billion which is flexible from 
highways to transit projects. The funding can be directed through several different 
programs, the most important of which are the Surface Transportation Program and the 
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program. 

The Surface Transportation Program authorized $23.9 billion over six years establishing a 
$19 billion flexible, intermodal program out of the old Federal Air Primary, Secondary and 
Urban systems program. This program allows for funding of transit capital projects, carpool 
projects, and a variety of air quality control measures. 

The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality program authorized $6 billion all of which is 
flexible to mass transit. This program is intended to fund projects that will contribute to 
attainment of national ambient air quality standards. In addition, while the funds will be 
generally apportioned according to non-attainment area population, the formula also 
recognizes that an extreme ozone non-attainment area requires additional funding. Los 
Angeles is the only area in the country that would currently qualify as an extreme ozone non- 
attainment area. 

The flexibility aspects describe above will empower local officials to direct scarce federal 
resources to projects providing the most benefits for dollars spent by taking into account 
local transportation needs and costs impacts. One of the benefits of flexibility is seen in a 
breakdown of the cost to change from traditional diesel fuel to alternatively fueled vehicles. 



2761 



Flexibility of these dollars could be used to assist transit operators in meeting the cost 
demands of clean air mandates. The State of California has been ahead of the nation in 
• establishing regulations for cleaning our air. The MTA's experience puts it in a good 
position to discuss the impacts of these increased costs and the impact that flexible spending 
of highways dollars can have on Los Angeles' system. 

While the transit industry struggles to meet increasing service demands with a shrinking 
federal investment in operations, the costs to expand paratransit service, capital investments 
for accessible vehicles and facilities, purchase and maintenance of clean air vehicles, 
proposed regulations on drug testing, and President Clinton's proposed broad-based energy 
tax, add pressure to transit agency budgets. 

Additionally, federal regulations for underground fuel storage tanks require that the MTA 
spend an estimated $12 million to replace or modify existing fuel storage tanks at its 12 
operating divisions. Combined with new regulations for drug testing, that would bring the 
total cost of the MTA's program to nearly $2.3 million a year. 

Any federal policy that makes transit less competitive, in our opinion, will be 
counterproductive. If increased transit costs are passed on to transit customers, whether as 
higher fares or service reductions, the MTA's ability to increase ridership and thereby save 
energy and reduce air pollution will be adversely impacted. 

The transit industry has struggled to meet increasing service demands with a shrinking 
federal investment in operations. In 1980, federal operating assistance made up 47.3% of 
the MTA's total operating subsidy. Today only 1 1.0% or $47 million of our operating 
assistance comes from the federal government, well below the 50% federal matching cap. 
It is our understanding that the Administration's 1994 budget numbers are approximately 
22% below the authorized operating assistance levels in ISTEA. 

Operating assistance is essential to all transit operators regardless of size. Operating 
assistance should be funded at the $1,034 billion in FY 1994, the level authorized by ISTEA. 

Should this federal operating assistance continue to dwindle, we will be forced to take one of 
two actions: 

• Cut service by approximately 16%. This action would result in a loss of 
service to over 200,000 daily riders; or 

• Increase fares by about 30 cents. 

A fare increase of this magnitude would result in a loss of 5% of the MTA's total annual 
rfdership, approximately 21,000,000 riders annually. The increased auto use by the 21 
million former transit users at the average auto occupancy level of 1.396 passengers per 
vehicle would generate an additional 25 tons per day of mobile source emissions, 9,125 tons 
annually. 



The Congress should make absolutely clear that the Secretary should adjust Section 9 formula 
appropriations from the mass transit account of the highway trust fund and the general fund 
of the Treasury to assure that each recipient receives from the general fund of the Treasury 
an amount equal to the recipient's operating cap or, where the recipient's total apportionment 
is lower that its operating cap, an amount equal to the recipient's apportionment. This could 
be accomplished by adding Section 9 to the list of sections that can be funded from the mass 
transit account of the highway trust fund under section 21(a)(1) in section 3025 of the Act. 

While the emphasis would appear to be on federal operating assistance, we do not want the 
Subcommittee to underestimate the cost of maintenance, facilities, and purchase costs. 



2762 



Full funding for programs that are flexible to transit will not only allow industry to meet 
federal clean air goals, but provide increased and more efficient service, improved facilities, 
expand the number of busways and rail lines, and establish a national intermodal 
transportation system. 



Conclusion 

Fully funding the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority's request for 
$208 million in FY 1994 will continue Los Angeles' strong commitment to support the 
mandates set forth by Congress while creating thousands of jobs, both locally and nation 
wide. Funding for Metro Red Line's Segment 2 will fulfill Congress' share of $667 million 
and, combined with continued funding of Segment 3, will ensure that Los Angeles proceeds 
with its ambitious program to enhance mobility and make significant air quality 
improvements. Combined with the MTA's request of $18 million for the Gateway 
Intermodal Transit Center at Union Station, Congress will carry on its critical role as a 
partner in the effort to develop one of the most efficient transportation networks in the 
country. 



2763 

LOS ANGELES AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 
STATEMENT OF RAY REMY, PRESIDENT 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for providing us the opportunity to appear before your Committee 
this morning. My name is Ray Remy and I am President of the Los Angeles Area Chamber 
of Commerce and the alternate of Mayor Tom Bradley to the Los Angeles County 
Metropolitan Transportation Authority. 

Los Angeles is making great strides to create mobility options to lessen our dependence on 
the automobile, improve the region's air quality, and create jobs for our county's workforce. 
However, we are also in the middle of one of the worst economic recessions since the 
1930's. 

Unemployment in Los Angeles County is at eleven percent (11%), the highest since the eariy 
1980s. Massive defense cutbacks have hurt our region, forcing specialized high skilled labor 
to search for alternative employment markets. The civil disturbance of last April and the 
general state of the economy has significantly impacted our tourism industry. And our 
construction industry is facing one of the most difficult years of the past decade. Combined, 
the result is that Los Angeles County has a significantly higher unemployment rate than the 
national average. 

Yet, despite this gloomy tale, Los Angeles is clearly embarked upon developing a highly 
effective system of public transportation, from bus and paratransit services, light rail and 
commuter rail, to the opening of the Metro Red Line, Los Angeles' first modern subway. 

One of the most important programs for Los Angeles is the construction of our rail program, 
in particular the Metro Rail project. The overall rail program, which includes light rail, 
heavy rail and commuter rail services, will provide numerous options to the residents of the 
entire Southern California region, encouraging them to leave their cars at home and take 
public transportation to and from work. 

This effort is significant in reducing traffic on our congested freeways and reducing harmful 
emissions like Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Reactive Organic Gases (ROG), and Particulate 
Matter (PM-10) that have such a detrimental effect on our air quality. Equally important, 
construction of the Metro Rail project means jobs to a region that has felt the impact of the 
recession more severely than any other region in the country. 

President Clinton stated a few months ago that our country's economy could not rebound 
without a recovery in Los Angeles. Knowing that such a recovery can only occur with a 



2764 



stimulus in job creation and retention, we are proud to say that construction of liie Metro 
Red Line project has created more than 46,000 jobs for just the first segment of the Metro 
Red Line. Completion of the second leg of the Metro Rail project will have created more 
than 41,900 additional jobs. With the federal government's help, the Metro Rail project will 
be a large source of employment for a region that has had its share of unemployment 
problems, creating more than 140,000 jobs from 1987 to the year 2001. 

There are other ancillary social and economic benefits of rail transit development as well. 
Such benefits extend to a myriad of business enterprises including joint development and 
entrepreneurial opportunities. Additionally, community and regional benefits derived from 
congestion relief, reduced energy consumption and improved air quality cannot be 
underestimated. Transportation has and will continue to be a cornerstone of economic 
development for many cities including Los Angeles. 

The business community has realized the many primary and secondary benefits of public 
transportation. Rail development, in particular, is a source of long-term, direct employment 
and provides unique opportunities for minority and women owned enterprises. The 
multiplier effect that results from such highly-skilled employment will provide many social 
benefits that cannot be measured by employment statistics alone. Joint development 
partnerships can provide the economic and social benefits of increased transportation 
accessibility for all income levels of our multi-cultural and 

ethnic community. Additionally, rail development complements our efforts to enhance 
property values and assist in the re-gentrification of existing urban neighborhoods. 

Further development of Metro Rail will provide employers with options to offer more 
transportation alternatives to their employees. According to last year's sUtistics, an average 
of 137,397 hours are wasted each day in traffic congestion on Los Angeles County freeways, 
costing business an estimated $240 million annually. Fully forty percent (40%) of 
commuters say they would be willing to consider alternatives to driving alone. The business 
community believes that building Metro Rail is an important step to providing such 
alternatives. 

Our request for a total of $208 million, $190 million for the Metro Rail project ($70 million 
for completion of the federal government's share of $667 million for MOS-2 and $120 
million for MOS-3 divided equally between the three segments) and $18 million for the 
Gateway Intermodal Transit Center at Union Station will create thousands of jobs for Los 
Angeles and help to stimulate our ailing economy. 



2765 



Your continued investment in surface transportation is important nationally, but may be 
nowhere more important than l^s Angeles at this time. We appreciate the federal 
government's commitment in previous years to assist Los Angeles to develop a world-class 
transportation network, and we look forward to continuing that partnership to complete the 
Metro Rail project. 

Thank you. 



2766 



LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION 

AUTHORITY 

STATEMENT OF FRANKLIN WHITE, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFHCER 

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today, as this is my first 
appearance before Congress in my new capacity as Chief Executive Officer of the Los 
Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA). 

As you may know, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority is the 
result of a merger which took place on April 1 of this year, between the Southern 
California Rapid Transit District, and the Los Angeles County Transportation 
Commission. In the past, bus and rail operations were conducted by the Southern 
California Rapid Transit District, and the planning, programming of funds and 
construction of transportation facilities in Los Angeles County were the re.sponsibility of 
the LA County Transportation Commission. 

This merged operation is designed to increase efficiency and reduce the costs of 
delivering transportation services to the people of our area. 

We have, I believe, the largest public works project in the country with the construction 
of the Metro Rail system in Los Angeles. We operate one of the largest bus .systems in 
the United States, and we have an annual budget that rivals that of many countries. 

This is a huge undertaking, and I am proud to be associated with the many outstanding 
people who make up the MTA. 

While I am new to Los Angeles. I am not new to transportation. Prior to joining the 
MTA, I was the Commissioner of Transportation for the State of New York. I served in 
the Virginia Department of Transportation, and in the Carter Administration during the 
1970s. 

I am well aware of the outstanding work that you and this Subcommittee have done in 
the past, and I am looking forward to working with you and the Subcommittee to 
improve our transportation network for Southern California. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to make these remarks. 



2767 



MEMPHIS, TN 
STATEMENT OF THE MEMPHIS AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY 

The Memphis Area Transit Authority (MAT A) and the City of Memphis are making a 
strong commitment to transit as a viable mobility alternative for its citizens. 

On April 29, 1993 the Main Street Trolley was inaugurated. This project is the first step 
in development of a complete downtown rail transit and terminal system. It was largely financed 
with Interstate Substitution funds that local decision-makers chose to allocate to transit rather 
than highways. This decision is evidence of local support for rail transit. In addition, private 
funding commitments, currently totaling over $1 million, were secured for purchase and 
restoration of vintage trolley vehicles. The fund raising effort is continuing with additional 
corporate sponsors expected to be added in the near future. Overall, the project was completed 
within 1 % of budget. 

The Main Street Trolley is also the beginning of the process of implementing passenger 
rail service throughout the Memphis area to improve mobility and support economic 
development. Federal financial assistance is being requested for four projects -- three of which 
will provide the remaining part of the downtown circulation system (see map), and the fourth 
will provide the technical basis for proceeding into detailed planning and engineering for 
regional rail corridors. Two of these projects. Central Station Intermodal Terminal and North 
End Transit/Parking Facility, have previously received earmarks from Congress. Like the Main 
Street Trolley project, these projects will be implemented with the support of a broad-based 
public/private partnership. The projects are described more fully in the following sections. 
CENTRAL STATION INTERMODAL TERMINAL 

Background - Current and proposed developments in the downtown area create the need 

for strategic locations for intermodal transfers for trains, trolleys and intercity buses, as well as 
intercept locations for automobiles and buses entering the Central Business District (CBD). 

Central Station provides an ideal location as a peripheral transfer point not only for local transit 

and transportation but also for inter-city transit and transportation. In this regard. Central 

Station represents, in many respects, an ideal opportunity for the development of an intermodal 

terminal. The project is also designed to aid revitalization of the entire area. 



2768 



Central Station is located on 13 acres in the southern part of the Central Business District 
(CBD), at the southern terminus of the Main Street Trolley. The property includes an eight- 
story Terminal Building, a Powerhouse Building and a Package Express Building. The 
remainder of the property is vacant except for railroad tracks that pass through the site. The 
Terminal Building and Powerhouse Building were built in 1914 and have considerable historic 
significance. Both are listed as contributing buildings within districts that are on the National 
Register of Historic Places. Currently, the only active part of the buildings is a small portion 
of the first floor of the Terminal Building utilized by AMTRAK as its passenger terminal. 

Project Description - The historic Central Station buildings will be renovated and new 
facilities will be constructed in order to serve the various transportation modes that will be 
included in the project. The Terminal Building will be carefully restored, and upgraded as 
necessary to meet current construction codes and functional needs of the transportation tenants. 
The first and second fioors will accommodate the transportation tenants with some space 
available for lease to commercial tenants. The upper floors will be developed for lease as office, 
residential and housing space. MATA plans to move its administrative offices into the Terminal 
Building. 

Other parts of the project include construction of a intercity bus area with parking 

adjacent to, and connected to, the Terminal Building, construction of a bus terminal area for 
MATA buses, renovation of the Powerhouse Building, renovation of the Package Express 

Building, provision of 1,000 surface parking spaces, and various other site improvements. The 

total square footage of the existing and proposed buildings is approximately 192,000. 

Project Status - A total of $6 million in federal funds has been committed in FY-92 and 
FY-93. The remaining federal funds, totaling $5.9 million, are requested for FY-94. Major 
transportation tenants will provide a 13% overmatch for this project. Final negotiations are 
underway for acquisition of the property. Design will begin in Fall 1993, with construction 
expected to be completed by late 1995. 
NORTH END TRANSIT/PARKING FACILITY 

Background - The North End Terminal is a companion project to Central Station. It 
would be constructed in the northern part of the CBD in an area known as the Pinch District. 



2769 



This facility will intercept CBD-bound traffic by providing for bus-trolley transfers, bus-bus 
transfers, and auto-trolley transfers. Additional benefits of a facility in this area are the ability 
to generate revenue from parking for events in the nearby Pyramid Arena, a 20,000-seat multi- 
purpose facility that handles about 150 events per year, including all of the Memphis State 
University basketball team's home games. The North End Terminal will also provide a catalyst 
for continued redevelopment by increasing the amount of activity in the Pinch District. The 
proposed site is one city block comprising about 2.25 acres, including one 40,000 square foot 
building. The site is at the northern terminus of the Main Street Trolley line. The site has good 
major street access and is served by several MATA bus routes. 

Project D escription - A transit transfer terminal and parking facility will be constructed 
on the site at the comer of Main Street and Auction Avenue. The project will provide facilities 

for MATA bus transferring, automobile parking, MATA office space, and other leasable space. 
New construction will include bus berths in the terminal area with associated passenger waiting 

areas on the ground level, and structured parking for up to 500 automobiles above the bus 

terminal. A portion of the existing building will be used for MATA's Customer Information 

Center, with the remainder leased for office-related activities. 

Project Status - A total of $3,815 million in federal funds has been committed in FY-92 

and FY-93. The remaining federal funds, totaling $3.6 million, are requested for FY-94. Final 

negotiations are underway for acquisition of the property. Design will begin in Fall 1993, with 

construction expected to be completed by late 1995. 

RIVERFRONT LOOP 

Background - The Main Street Trolley serves the central portion of downtown and many 
of its trip generation points. However, the area near the riverfront of the Mississippi River is 
not directly served and it also has a number of major generators, including the Pyramid Arena, 
the South Bluffs residential development, Mud Island Park, Tom Lee Park, and several 
restaurants and clubs. The riverfront area has existing railroad tracks that are available for 
purchase and use in passenger rail service. These tracks are parallel to the Main Street Trolley 
tracks for most of its length. 



2770 



Project Description - The Main Street Trolley will be extended to create a downtown loop 
utilizing existing rail tracks along the riverfront and short sections of new trackage. The right- 
of-way is owned by the City of Memphis. This property could be donated to the project as 
overmatch. Within the right-of-way, the trackage is owned by the Illinois Central Railroad and 
is available for purchase. New tracks will be constructed to connect the north and south ends 
of the Main Street Trolley with the existing tracks and to provide passing tracks at various locations. 

Project Status - A total of $3. 1 million in federal Interstate Substitution funds has been 
appropriated in FY-91, FY-92 and FY-93 and designated for this project. The remaining $1 
million in Memphis' Interstate Substitution is expected to be appropriated in FY-94. The 
remaining federal funds, totaling $5.9 million in Section 3 funding, is requested for FY-94. 
Detailed planning and environmental studies will be initiated later this year, with engineering 
design to be completed in 1994 and construction completed in 199S. 

REGIONAL RAIL PLAN 

Background - In the late 1980's MATA initiated steps to bring modem light rail transit 
(LRT) to Memphis. A Long Range Transit Plan, completed in 1989, analyzed bus service 
requirements for a 20-year period and identified the Poplar Corridor as having potential for a 
major transit capital investment. In 1990, a Commuter Rail Study of the Poplar Corridor and 
a corridor serving Cordova was completed. This study evaluated the feasibility of implementing 
commuter rail services on existing tracks in conjunction with freight trains. There has been no 
comprehensive study of all major travel corridors and availability of railroad rights-of-way to 
aid the decision-making process for future policies regarding rail transit in the Memphis area. 

Project Description - The Regional Rail Plan would update, expand and provide more 
detailed analysis of travel corridors with a high potential for future investment in rail transit. 
Major travel corridors would be studied in detail to determine physical feasibility, cost, potential 
ridership, technology options, and financing methods. 

Project Status - No funds have been secured for this project at the present time. A 12-18 
month time period is projected for the study. 



2771 



DOWNTOWN 
MEMPHIS 



i*:i 

Ilarbortown/ 
\ Development 



BpnHHHbb 

NortJi End Transit/;;^ 



Par king Facility ^ / 



DDL-iSt.Josffrind)^ 
1 1 inVSt. Jude Hospitals 




Main Street l.inc 
Riverfront [extension 



2772 



STATEMENT OF METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, FL 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, 

The Board of County Commissioners of Dade County, Florida, 
is pleased to submit the following testimony in support of the 
Metropolitan Dade County System of Airports. 

Miami International Airport (MIA) is the world's tenth 
busiest airport in total passenger traffic. On a national scale, 
our airport is second busiest in terms of international passengers 
and cargo. The Dade County System of Airports, and particularly 
MIA, is one of Dade County's primary economic catalysts and 
continues to experience significant growth under the direction of 
the Metro-Dade Aviation Department. Nearly 27 million passengers 
and over one million tons of cargo travelled through MIA during 
1992. The aviation industry has a tremendous impact on our 
community, as one in five of us derives our livelihood from 
aviation-related activities, accounting for an annual payroll of 
$1.4 billion. Aviation's total local economic impact aunounts to 
over $9 billion. 

Miami International Airport is the "Hub of the Americas," 
linking all of Latin America and the Caribbean with North America 
and Europe and more recently Africa. The airport offers an 
impressive air service network which extends to over 180 cities 
on four continents. Scheduled airlines now number 100 - more 
than any other airport in the world. An additional 42 carriers 
operate under charter authority. MIA is also unique in that it 
controls 100% of its gates - no long-term, exclusive-use leases 
exist for any of the airport's 118 gates, with fees being assessed 
on a per-use basis for the gates, concourses, and baggage systems. 

In order to maintain MIA's economic vieOsility, the Aviation 
Department is finalizing a Master Plan and Capacity Study to 
fine-tune proposed facility construction, maximize land usage, 
and determine an accurate forecast of the airport's true capacity. 



2773 



Information from this study now points toward even higher passenger 
and cargo figures than have been historically projected, with 
forecasts for 48 million passengers for the year 2005, a 20% 
increase over original projections, and cargo tonnage forecasts 
to rapidly increase to an estimated 2.2 million tons for the year 
2005. 

The phenomenal growth experienced at MIA has created a 
substantial strain on the supporting infrastructure. In the 
terminal area, we are presently short of gates and passenger 
handling facilities to handle international flights. This is 
occurring at a time when many of our air carriers are expanding 
service including Iberia Airlines of Spain, which has made MIA 
its Latin American hub, and American Airlines which is 
accelerating its planned growth. Projections for this summer 
reflect peak days of over 28,000 arriving international passengers 
through our Federal Inspection Facilities. 

Ground access to the airport is made difficult by present 
levels of traffic, both on airport roads and surrounding off- 
airport roadways. Our cargo facilities are insufficient to meet 
demand. One half million square feet of additional cargo 
facilities are presently needed to accommodate the expansion 
needs of our current tenants. The roadway system in the cargo 
areas also must be upgraded to meet the demands of vehicular 
traffic which is a vital component of cargo operations. 

With the number of aircraft operations increasing by 35% 
during the last ten years, the airfield is rapidly approaching 
capacity as well. Delays have begun to exceed acceptable levels 
during daily peak-hour periods. 

Solving Miauni International Airport's capacity limitations 
is a major challenge. The airport is completely surrounded by 
urban development, which limits further expansion outside present 
boundaries. It is, therefore, necessary to optimize the use of 
existing space in the planing process to accommodate future 
growth. 



2774 



A $2 billion expansion and modernization plan is underway to 
accommodate projected increases in passenger and cargo traffic. 
This development program, which will continue into the next 
century, will provide much needed job opportunities for our 
community. 

Last summer, ground was broken for the first phase of a $500 
million Cargo Facility Development Program, which will bring 
on-line state-of-the-art cargo handling facilities. This first 
phase has resulted in the awarding of $47 million worth of 
construction contracts in 1992, just part of over $100 million 
worth of construction contracts which were awarded that year. 
Construction of four additional cargo buildings, which will 
provide a total of 680,000 square feet of cargo space having an 
estimated construction value of $66.4 million, will commence 
later this year. 

In the Terminal Building, expansion projects are creating 
new passenger and airline facilities. Construction of up to four 
new concourses and extensions to existing concourses will increase 
aircraft gates to nearly 170 from the present 118 gates. 

Phase I of a new Concourse "A" and the related apron and 
utilities project, is under construction, and Phase II will 
commence construction in the summer. This new concourse will 
provide 20 new international gates and is the first phase of a 
recently-approved development plan to facilitate American Airlines' 
expansion at MIA. American has grown over the last three years 
to be the airport's largest air carrier, carrying over 40% of 
MIA's passengers. The expansion plan calls for the construction 
of a mile-long linear terminal complex with 60 gates spanning 
from the new Concourse "A" to an extended Concourse "D," which 
American currently occupies. 

The balance of the airport terminal is programmed for 
general upgrading of interior spaces, life safety systems, and 
improvements required by the American with Disabilities Act. 



2775 



On the land-side of the airport, $124 million of ground 
transportation improvements are under construction or in the 
design phase. New ramps, providing better access to the upper 
drive and future Concourse "A," were recently completed. 
Additional roadway improvements for the passenger and cargo areas 
and expanded parking facilities are also planned or currently 
being constructed. 

The County Commission has recently approved a new 8,500 ft. 
air-carrier runway on the north side of the airport to provide 
the additional capacity required for the 678,000 aircraft opera- 
tions projected for the year 2010. 

In summary, the level of construction throughout the county's 
system of airports has reached an all-time high of $359 million 
worth of executed contracts. Additionally, $618 million worth of 
future projects are currently in the design phase. 

The County maintains its commitment to giving opportunities 
to minority contractors. Minority participation in the Miscella- 
neous Construction Contract - an $18.5 million, two-year contract 
which provides a vehicle for construction of small and emergency 
projects - is currently estimated at 76%. 

It is also importaint to note that our construction program 
has remained relatively on schedule despite the devastation 
caused last summer by the nation's largest natural disaster. 
Hurricane Andrew. Additionally, the diligent efforts of Aviation 
Department and Federal Aviation Administration staff allowed for 
the reopening of MIA for limited service just 42 hours after its 
closing to brace for the storm. Work crews fixed security 
fencing, made many gates operational, restored p)ower to the 
terminal, and fixed navigational aids. The airport was prepared 
for full airline schedules on September 2, 1992, just eight days 
after the storm. 

Unfortunately, our reliever airports did not fare as well. 
Kendall-Tamiami Executive Airport and Homestead General Aviation 
Airport were totally devastated, with m£my hangars being totally 



2776 



destroyed and with major daunage to most other airport facilities. 
The runways were quickly cleared of debris and prepared to accept 
the armada of military and relief flights that began to arrive in 
our community. However, the rebuilding of the airport facilities 
which has already commenced, will be a slow process. 

The $2 billion expansion program at Miami International 
Airport will stretch funding needs beyond its capabilities. 
Crucial to our system of airports' continued viability is the 
availability of State and Federal funding to finance capacity 
enhancement projects at these facilities. 

As you know, the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) is the 
primary source of federal funding for airports. The AIP was 
reauthorized in 1992 for one additional year and will expire at 
the end of FY 1993. With the support of Congress, airports were 
successful in obtaining many desired program improvements in the 
1992 AIP reauthorization. This year, we would like to see a 
multi-year reauthorization of the AIP that preserves the program 
improvements enacted in 1992. 

Additionally, we would like to see the AIP authorized at a 
level above the $2.05 billion authorized for FY 1993, and AIP 
appropriations at a level above the $1.8 billion appropriated in 
FY 1993. 

We are also very concerned over the Passenger Facility 
Charge (PFC) program. This Subcommittee's FY 1993 DOT appropria- 
tions bill approved language, subsequently enacted into law, 
which banned the collection of PFC charges from passengers 
travelling on frequent flyer awards. The FAA has ruled that the 
provision did not amend the PFC statute and only applies for FY 
1993. 

Metropolitan Dade County strongly opposes that provision and 
future provisions which diminish PFC revenues. Attempts by 
certain airlines to influence Congress and the new Administration 
to impose a permanent ban on frequent flyer PFCs, and further, to 



2777 



restrict, limit, or possibly prohibit collection from connecting 
passengers, must be strongly opposed. 

Frequent flyers could account for approximately 10% of MIA's 
traffic, and connecting passengers now constitute approximately 
35% of MIA's traffic. These percentages will likely grow in 
future years. Later in our testimony, you will hear about MIA's 
plans for a Multi-Modal Transportation Center to be financed by 
PFCs. This project is extremely important to our community. 

Restricting the collection of PFCs from certain classes of 
passengers would seriously erode viability of the PFC program and 
cause a substantial loss of PFC revenues which airports desper- 
ately need to finance projects and stimulate economic growth for 
their communities. 

We urge this Subcommittee and Congress to reject any changes 
that adversely affect the PFC program or reduce airport PFC 
revenues. It is particularly important that the PFC prograjn move 
ahead without change or disruption to ensure it is the stable, 
reliable and independent airport funding source that Congress 
intended. Any changes diminishing PFC revenues will make it 
extremely difficult to leverage PFCs through bonding to raise 
additional private capital for airport investment. 

Turning our attention to Miami International Airport's 
specific funding requests, it is important to note that given the 
pressing capital development needs of MIA, discretionary dollars 
from the AIP will assume greater financial importance. Miami 
plays a significant role in the nation's and this hemisphere's 
air transportation network, and the urgency with which we must 
respond to the demands of ever-growing passenger and cargo 
traffic is critical. As this Subcommittee is aware, other 
airports across the country, some with less pressing needs, have 
already received long-term funding commitments from the FAA and 
it is the intent of MIA to seek this same type of commitment./ 

Mr. Chairman and members, commitment from this Subcommittee 
and the FAA to support a long-term funding commitment is critical 



2778 



to base future programming of our projects and corresponding bond 
commitments. Though we are not yet in a position to describe in 
full detail our long-term funding needs, we need your assistance 
in obtaining this commitment. 

On April 13, 1992, the Aviation Department gave the FAA 
advance notification of its proposal to request Letters of Intent 
(LOI) as authorized by Section 513 (d) of the Airport and Airway 
Improvement Act of 1982 as amended by the Airport and Airway 
Safety and Capacity Expansion Act of 1987. This proposal is now 
being revised in light of the recently-approved development 
concept to provide expanded facilities for American Airlines. It 
is our hope that our LOI proposal will receive serious considera- 
tion since federal funding is critically needed for the success 
of MIA's $2 billion development program. 

While our LOI proposal is being finalized, we urge your 
support of our FY 1994 AIP funding request. The following 
projects are scheduled to start construction in FY 1994, if 
federal funding is available and we urge your support in securing 
FY 1993 discretionary and entitlement funding for these projects: 



Estimated AIP Required AIP 

Project Eligible Amount Funding 

Concourse "H" Apron $ 4,953,000 $ 3,715,000 

Cargo Bldg. 2226 Apron, Phase I 4,800,000 3,600,000 

Cargo Bldg. 2226 Apron, Phase 2 4,700,000 3,500,000 

Cargo Bldg. 2207 Apron 2,000,000 1,500,000 

Cargo Bldg. N805 Apron 3,500,000 2,625,000 

Concourse "A" Apron, Phase 2 7,500,000 5,600,000 

Northside Cargo Facility Apron 3,500,000 2,625,000 

Ground Transportation Improvements 

Package C-2, Upper/Lower Drive 

Widening & Aux. Curbside Lanes 20,000,000 15,000,000 

Concourse "A" Expansion, Phase 2 14,000,000 10,500,000 

Terminal Ext. North, Phase 3 24,000,000 18,000,000 

Radar Relocation, Remote Trans- 
mitter Relocation, and Relocation 
of Other NAVAID and Communication 

Cables 3,000,000 2,250,000 



2779 



Runway 30 Glide Slope/ALS 1,200,000 900,000 

Midfield Area Development, 

Phase 1 Taxiways 5,000,000 3,500,000 

TOTAL $103.153.000 $76.815.000 

Funding of these projects and other planned projects is 
critical to providing additional capacity at the nation's second 
busiest international gateway. We urge your strong support. 

Another issue that we must bring to your attention is the 
impact of the recommended closure of Homestead Air Force Base 
( HAFB ) . 

Prior to Hurricane Andrew, Homestead AFB was a thriving 
military complex, base for the 31st Tactical Wing of the Air 
Force, and home for reserve and guard units as well as a host of 
military support facilities and governmental agencies, including 
U.S. Customs, Drug Enforcement Agencies and others. About 6,000 
military and 1,500 civilian personnel were employed at the Air 
Base, which also served as host base for 22,000 retired military 
members and over 7,500 military reserve, air national guard, and 
Coast Guard personnel. Annual aircraft operations were at a 
level of 130,000 movements. The base had an economic impact of 
$500 million annually on the South Florida economy and directly 
represented about one-third of the economic activity of South 
Dade County. 

Within eight hours. Hurricane Andrew wreaked havoc on the 
Base and South Dade County. Most hangars, buildings, and the 
control tower were heavily damaged or destroyed, and airside 
infrastructure was impaired. Primary military units on the base 
had to be remobilized temporarily to other sites. 

On March 12, 1993, Secretary of Defense Les Aspin forwarded 
his report recommending certain base closures to the Base Closure 
and Realignment Commission (BRAG) with Homestead Air Force Base 
being recommended for closure. While we were very disheartened 
by the recommendation and would like to see HAFB restored to 



2780 



pre-Hurricane condition and status, we also see an opportunity to 
provide additional civil aviation capacity in South Florida. 

Weeks before the closure recommendation had been announced, 
the Dade County Board of County Commissioners awarded a $4 
million contract to study the feasibility of civil aviation uses 
for Homestead Air Force Base. The initial phase of the study 
which includes market analysis of aviation uses is being fast- 
tracked to correspond with the BRAC process. 

Given the great difficulty in today's environment of 
selecting sites for new airports, it Is imperative that this 
aviation facility be preserved for aviation uses, which hopefully 
may include joint military/civilian uses. We will be working 
closely with the Department of Defense' Office of Economic 
Adjustment and the White House task force coordinating the 
hurricane relief effort to develop a base reuse plan which will 
restore the lost jobs and preserve this important aviation 
facility. 

Your support in providing funding for the later phases of 
the HAFB feasibility study in the amount of approximately $3.5 
million would be very welcomed and would free up funds for other 
Dade County System of Airports projects. Additionally, once a 
re-use plan for HAFB is finalized, we hope that we can count on 
your support for including Homestead Air Force Base in the 
Military Airports Program and for providing funding from AlP 
discretionary and FAA Facilities and Equipment sources. 

Mr. Chairman and Members, we would also like to discuss with 
you another issue, that although not in the immediate jurisdiction 
of your subcommittee, should interest you as promoters of an 
efficient transportation system - the need for increased appro- 
priations from user fees for federal inspection staffing. 

Foreign tourism contributes a positive balance of payment 
for the nation of more than $1 billion per month. Inconveniencing, 
delaying, and frustrating arriving international passengers would 
have a negative impact on tourism and international trade and 



2781 



commerce, particularly to a city like Miami which is now so 
dependent upon international tourism and international trade. 

Adequate staffing of federal inspection services is essential 
to expedite air passenger processing. Five federal agencies are 
involved in the facilitation process, the Immigration and 
Naturalization Service (INS), the U.S. Customs Service, the USDA 
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), the Fish and 
Wildlife Administration and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 
The first three agencies, INS, Customs, and APHIS collect, user 
fees to fund their inspection programs at ports of entry. The 
funds being collected are sufficient to pay for the federal 
inspection programs at the nation's airports. However, in the 
perennial quest to balance the federal budget, these funds are 
not appropriated at adequate levels and instead go unspent to 
mask the federal deficit. 

We believe that this is a situation which should not be 
tolerated. It betrays the trust of the American people when user 
fees are collected to pay for a service and, instead of spending 
the collections for the purpose intended, the funds are held 
hostage to the federal deficit. 

Miami International Airport has been a leader in the industry 
working with the International Civil Aviation Association to 
establish a standard of 45 minutes for passengers clearing 
through the federal inspection process. We take facilitation 
very seriously, as we know that the success of our airport and 
the economy of our community depends largely on moving passengers 
and cargo through our airport as quickly and efficiently as 
possible. 

Over the years, MIA has not received its fair share of INS, 
Customs, and APHIS inspectors. JFK airport in New York has twice 
as many INS inspectors as MIA, and yet, Miami now processes more 
foreign-citizen arrivals than JFK. We recently constructed a 
20-booth INS inspection facility at MIA's Satellite Terminal to 
relieve our central FIS facility of severe over-crowding. These 



2782 



new booths will not be staffed unless new INS inspector positions 
are approved for MIA. 

The U.S. Customs Service, though more successful than INS 
and APHIS, in increasing staffing at MIA, is still desperately 
short of inspectors, given the new international gates MIA will 
soon be bringing on line as well as the new cargo facilities. 

Florida airports generate approximately $23 million in APHIS 
user fee revenues, yet the total APHIS budget for all Florida 
airports is under $11 million. This is startling in light of the 
fact that Florida is a high-risk state for the introduction of 
exotic pests and diseases due to its subtropical climate which 
allows such to establish themselves, if not detected at the port 
of entry. APHIS at MIA requests allocation of additional inspector 
positions, and consistently is either denied additional positions 
or additional positions are approved only to be followed by the 
imposition of staff-year ceilings halting the hiring of new 
inspectors. APHIS estimates that the perishables traffic at MIA 
will increase by 40% this coming year. Combined with the overall 
growth in passenger volume and cargo tonnage, if additional 
staffing is not authorized, our facilitation system at MIA will 
totally break-down with disastrous consequences to our local 
economy. 

We urge this subcommittee to support the full utilization of 
federal inspection staffing user fees and to assure that MIA 
receives its fair-share of federal inspectors. This will assure 
connected to the "Airport Loop" allowing us to eliminate the 
employee shuttle buses off the airport roadways. 

This Multi-Modal Terminal would also be linked to Tri-County 
Commuter Rail, to Amtrack, and to Metrorail. 

The plan also calls for a direct rail link between the 
airport and the Port of Miami. The light-rail type vehicles 
would be capable of utilizing the "Airport Loop" - facilitating 
passenger boarding and disembarking. The Port of Miami is the 
world's busiest cruise port with over 3.5 million passengers 



2783 



annually. Eighty percent of cruise passengers originate and 
terminate travel through MIA. At the present time, 16,000 
passengers per weekend day move between the airport and the 
seaport by 40-passenger buses. This equates to over 200 trips by 
buses four days a week. This activity leads to the need for 
large bus staging and loading/unloading areas and is a logistical 
nightmare. 

All told - the Multi-Modal Center is estimated to remove 
15,000 to 25,000 vehicles per day from airport roadways. 

We have notified the FAA of our intention to impose a 
Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) for the Airport Terminal transit 
loop and the portions of the Multi-Modal Transportation Center 
applicable to the Airport operation. We anticipate this PFC will 
provide between $100 million and $250 million for this project, 
which will be committed as the local share of the $1.4 billion 
transit expansion program. 

We believe that is an exciting, unique, and innovative 
project that could serve as a model for intermodalism for the 
nation. Our proposed funding methodology is equally innovative 
and in keeping with the new spirit of intermodalism which relies 
on cooperation and interaction between the DOT agencies. 

I strongly urge your support for a long-term funding 
coiivnitment for this important project. 

Mr. Chairman and Members, thank you for the opportunity to 
address you today on many important issues facing Dade County. I 
hope that you will give serious consideration to the funding 
proposals I have presented today, and to the pressing needs of 
the nation's airports and, particularly, Mieuni International 
Airport. I know that we can count on your leadership and support 
as we work together to upgrade the aviation infrastructure 
throughout the nation. 



2784 

I 

NEW ORLEANS, LA 

REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY 

STATEMENT OF WAYNE A. DUPRE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

CANAL STREET-CBD STREETCAR PROJECT: AN OVERVIEW 



Canal Street has played a pivotal role In the history of New Orleans. For anyone who lives In or visits 
the city, it is the axis of the area's urban geography. Canal Street is the city's largest and busiest 
arterial and the spine of its existing transit system. As the last street in the city to be stripped of 

streetcar tracks, it has been the focus 
of gfrowing community interest in the 
possibility of developing new light rail 
lines in New Orleans. Streetcars op- 
erated on Canal for more than a cen- 
tury- 103 years to the day to be exact- 
from June 1, 1861, through May 31, 
1964. 




Burgeoning community interest in the 
possible return of streetcars was en- 
dorsed in a 1989 report by the Urban 
Land Institute. Mayor Sidney 
Barthelemy subsequently requested 
that the Regional Planning Commis- 
sion for Jefferson, Orleans, St. Bernard 
and St. Tammany Parishes (RPC), in 
cooperation with the Regional Tran- 
sit Authority, to undertake a technical 
feasibility study for the extension of 
light rail transit service in the Central 
Business District. The resulting Down- 
town-Canal Street Streetcar Extension 
Study , funded in part with a grant from 
the Federal Transit Administration, 
developed preliminary recommenda- 
tions for replacing local bus service 
on Canal with streetcar service con- 
necting to the existing Riverfront line 
at one end and to a new Cemeteries 
transit terminal at the other (see Fig- 
ure 1). The report also proposed con- 
struction of a second Intersecting line 
linking the Union Passenger Termi- 
nal (UFT) to Louis Armstrong Park 
via Loyola Avenue cuid North Ram- 
part Street; construction of a new 
streetcar maintenance facility at the 
UPT; and redevelopment of the UFT as a true multi-modal transportation center providing connections 
to inter-city bus and rail service and light rail service to New Orleans International Airport. 



Canal Street Light Rail Corridor including legs to Louis Armstrong Park 
and the Louisiana Superdome/Union Passenger Terminal 



PROJECT DESCRIPTION 

The proposed Canal Street line will be approximately four miles long and will be located on the 
existing neutral ground, not in the street itself. From the riverfront to Claiborne Avenue, streetcars 
will share the median transltway-whlch is typically 46 feet wide in the downtown area-with the Canal 
express buses. From Claiborne Avenue to the opposite end of Canal Street, at City Park Avenue, the 



2785 



median is typicaily 32 feet wide; having been reduced, after the removal of streetcar tracks, to allow for 
an additional lane each direction in the roadway. Outbound streetcars will have to leave the neutral 
ground in the vicinity of the Cemeteries in order to make an S-tum onto City Park Avenue and then 
into the new transit terminal which will be located in the median of Canal Boulevard. The terminal 
will provide convenient connections between the Canal line and some eight RTA and suburban bus 
routes which currently connect or ter- 
minate at this location. The new street- 
car line will serve primarily commut- 
ers and shoppers travelling to or from 
the Central Business District, espe- 
cially those with office or retail desti- 
nations in or near the Canal Street 
corridor. 



The Intersecting Loyola-Rampart line 
will be approximately one mile long 
and will link such important trip at- 
tractions as the Union Passenger Ter- 
minal, the Louisiana Superdome, New 
Orleans Centre, the Civic Center and 
Louis Armstrong Park. A combina- 
tion of street and median operation 
will be required, with streetcars run- 
ning primarily on the neutral ground 
on Loyola and in the roadway on Ram- 
part. The line will serve a wide vari- 
ety of trip purposes commensurate 
with the diverse range of activity cen- 
ters located on the proposed route. 

A fleet of approximately 38 streetcars 
will be required to provide the recom- 
mended service. Since it is unlikely 
that many restorable "vintage" cars 
can be located, if visual compatibility 
writh the St. Charles and Riverfront 
streetcars is deemed requisite, it will 
probably be necessary to manufacture 
new replica trolley cars patterned on 
the 1923-24 Perley Thomas vehicles. 
These cars, while having the look of 

vintage streetcturs, will enjoy substantially better operating characteristics, through the use of restored 
PCC trucks, motors and other components. In addition, the cars will be made accessible to the 
han.dicapped and can even be equipped with air-condltlonlng. 




Detail of Canal Street Light Rail Corridor near New Orleans CBD and 
the French Quarter 



In order to provide adequate up-to-date storage and maintenance facilities for these vehicles, It has 
been proposed that property owned by Union Passenger Terminal be used for siting the necessau^r 
structures. Preliminary recommendations also call for development of park-and-ride facilities at four 
possible locations. Three of these are on the periphery of the CBD: at UPT, near the end of Elysian 
Fields Avenue and in the vicinity of the Convention Center. In addition, convenient parking can be 
provided for commuters In the vicinity of the proposed Cemeteries transit terminal at Canal Boule- 
vard. 



2786 



PLANNING REQUIREMENTS 

The Flegional Transit Authority is presently seeking Federal assistance, under Section 3 of the Urban 
Mass Transportation Act of 1964 as amended, for the purpose of conducting the additional planning 
and preliminaiy engineering activities which must bo completed before construction of the new light 
rail line(s) can get underway. Funding for the project was authorized by Congress in the Intermodal 
Surface Transportation Act of 199 1 (Title Ill-Federal Transit Act Amendments of 199 1, Section 3035(fff)). 
Local match will be provided by the Regional Transit Authority from funds made available by the City 
of New Orleans. 



The work to be performed will fall Into three distinct phases: 1) An update of systems planning for the 
New Orleans region, focusing on the tran- 
sit component of the Regional Transpor- 
tation Plan: 

2) Analysis of a range of alternatives-In- 
cluding "No-Build" and Transportation 
System Management options and various 
potential alignments for light rail service- 
-resulting in the selection of a preferred 
alternative for implementation; and 3) Pre- 
liminary Engineering, including the prepa- 
ration of an Environmental Impact State- 
ment (EIS), for the selected alternative. 

The recommendations developed by the 
Downtovm-Canal Street Streetcar Exten- 
sion Studv must be considered strictly pre- 
liminary and merely establish a starting- 
point for the definition of a whole range 
of options which will have to be consid- 
ered in Alternatives Analysis. In order to 
conform to Federal guidelines, consider- 
ation will have to be given to different 
levels of investment, alternative align- 
ments and technologies, service options 
and approaches to the mitigation of po- 
tential impacts on environmental, social, 
cultural and economic resources. Pro- 
jected capital and operating costs and pre- 
dicted dcUly ridership will have to be Iden- 
tified for each alternative, so that Its prob- 
able cost-effectiveness can be determined. 
The Federal Transit Administration has established threshold criteria for new ridership and cost per 
new rider which must be met If a project is to quaUfy for capital assistance. In addition, it will, of 
course, be necessary to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and to insure that the selected 
alternative will meet all applicable environmental requirements. 



CANAL STREETCARS 




PROJECT FUNDING 




PROJECT DURATION 


S Years 


PLANNING a ENGINEERING 

Sources: 

Fedeial 
Local NOETF 


'Millions) 
$6.0 

$48 
$1.2 


CONSTRUCTION 

Canal to Cemeteries 
Loyola/Rainparl 
Mainlenance Facility 
Park "n" Ride Facilities 
Terminals 


$46.3 

$16.1 
$9.3 

$15.1 
$4.0 
$1.8 


VEHICLE ACQUISITION 


$34.2 


TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 

Sources: 

Federal 
State 


$60.5 

$84.4 
$16.1 


$3.22/Year for 5 Years 1 





PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT 

The general purpose of the proposed streetcar construction project la to Improve transit service in the 
Canal Street corridor so as to Increase patronage and reduce net operating costs, while achieving 
compliance with federal regulations for handicapped accessibUlty and environmental protection. It Is 



2787 



anticipated that the proposed transit capital improvements will also significantly enhance opportuni- 
ties (or commercial reVitalization and economic redevelopment in the corridor. 

Light-rail transit offers the best means of meeting the mandates of both the Clean Air Act Amendments 
and Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, while maintaining current levels of service to the 
maximum extent possible. Where circumstances permit, conversion of existing bus service to light- 
rail transit is the preferred approach for achieving compliance. Circumstances in the Canal Street 
corridor are particularly conducive to this approach. For one thing. Canal Is the most heavily 
travelled route in New Orleans, making the maintenance of current levels of service a must. Moreover, 
the wide median which runs the length of Canal Street provides an ideal location for new streetcar 
tracks, stations and boarding platforms. Achieving compliance by other means (e.g.. replacing 
existing diesel-powered buses with transit coaches built to run on compressed natural gas and 
equipped with wheelchair lifts) would likely be less cost-effective In the long run and would almost 
certainly have serious adverse Impacts on transit operations In the short run. 

In addition, by removing transit from the street and separating It from ordinary vehicular traffic, It will 
be possible to drastically reduce the Inter-modal conflicts and congestion-related problems which 
make it virtually Impossible (or buses serving the downtown area to operate on schedule during peak 
travel periods. Improved transit performance and reduced travel times would attract new riders, 
especially commuters making dally work-trips to and from the Central Business District of the city. A 
Canal Streetcar line has the potential to achieve this objective on a near-term basis while establishing 
the spine of a future commuter light-rail network which will eventually reach out to all parts of the 
urbanized area. 

The proposed restoration of streetcar service to Canal Street represents a change In the basic infra- 
structure of the street which has potentially far-reaching Implications (or the future of the thorough- 
fare. Members of the business community feel very strongly that this Is the one measure likely to have 
a lasting and substantial beneflclal Impact on the attractiveness of Canal Street for commercial 
interests and investors. Construction of the proposed light-rail line would greatly improve access to 
the Canal Street corridor in the CBD, and enhance the aesthetic appeal of the street by replacing most 
buses currently operating on Canal, thus boosting demand for office and retail space and spurring an 
Increase in real estate values. Commercial revitalizatlon of the Canal Street corridor represents a 
primary purpose of the project-and will likely be the one by which Its success Is assessed in years to 
come. 

PROJECT FUNDING 

The projected total cost for planning and preliminary engineering for the proposed Canal Street-CBD 
Streetcar project is $6,000,000. This amount would fund three separate phases of the project: Systems 
Planning (S62S.000); Alternatives Analysis (Sl.875,000); and Prellmlnaiy Engineering ($3,500,000). It 
Is to be anticipated that there would be considerable overlap in work activities among these three 
phases, especially between the latter two. The Regional Trajisit Authority's pending grant application 
requests 80 percent (unding of these projected costs by the Federal Transit Administration. Thus, the 
Federal cost for the respective tasks is $500,000 for Systems Planning; $1,500,000 (or Alternatives 
Analysis: and $2,800,000 (or Preliminary Engineering. A total o( $4,800,000 in Federal funds, available 
under Section 3 of the Urban Mass Transportation Act o( 1964 as amended, and authorized (or this 
project under Title III o( the Federal Transit Act Amendments of 1991, is being requested. 

The corresponding 20-percent local-share amounts are $125,000 for Phase I; $375,000 for Phase 11 and 
$700,000 (or Phase III. The total loctU matching (unds amount o( $1,200,000 la to be provided by the 
City o( New Orleans. New Orleans voters in 1991 approved a reorganization of the city's debt which 
would free a significant amount of money to meet current needs. Funds specifically earmarked for the 
Canal Street Streetcar project were Included in the debt reorganization proposal submitted to the 



2788 



voters tor their approval. They will be made available from the New Orleans Economic Trust Fund 
established under theterms of the proposition approved by voters. 

Once a selected alternative has been identifled and approved by the Federal Transit Administration, 
and a Final Environmental Impact Statement has been adopted, the preparation of Final Design and 
Construction plans will get underway. Preliminary construction cost estimates were developed for the 
recommended improvements identified In the Canal Street-Downtown Streetcar Extension Studv . 
These improvements would Include trackwork (tracks, turnouts and crossovers): overhead electrifica- 
tion systems; the relocation of utilities, monuments and plant materials: new landscaping: signaliza- 
tion, signage and striping. The projected total construction coat for the Carnal Street line is approxi- 
mately $16,100,000. Construction costs for the proposed Loyola/Rampart line were projected at 
roughly S9,340,000. 

Capital improvements associated with the construction of a streetcar maintenance facility would 
include site preparation (demolition, clearing, grading, fencing and utilities): trackwork and eleotrifl- 
cation: and the construction of necessary structures tor heavy repair activities, running repair and 
operations. The projected total construction coot for these improvements is $15,100,000. 



The proposed transit terminal at Canal 
Boulevard would entail trackwork and 
overhead electrification: construction of 
Ave transit shelters located at bus stops, 
one main shelter and two information 
kiosks: paving (bus pullout areas, curbs, 
one roadway median crossing and pave- 
ment tor pedestrians at bus stops and the 
terminal): demolition of existing pavement, 
crossings and curbs where necessary: re- 
location of light poles and installation of 
new light and power poles: landscaping; 
slgnallzation. signage and striping. These 
proposed improvements would be made 
at a projected cost of S 1,760,000. 



The report Identified a number of diftei> 
ent options for rolling stock, including re- 
conditioned vintage cars, replicas of vin- 
tage cars and contemporary light-rail ve- 
hicles. No specific recommendation was made regarding the type of vehicle to be used. However, the 
number of vehicles required tor the proposed service was set at 33, with five spares tor a total ot 38. 
Assuming an average cost per car of (900.000, the total capital cost for rolling stock would be 
134,200.000. 



CANAL STREETCARS ■ 


ECONOMIC BENEFITS | 


PROJECT DURATION 


5 Years 


PROJECT EMPLOYMENT 


340 


Permanenl Jobs 


55 


Construction Jobs 


285 


CBD RELATED EMPLOYMENT 


3,300 


ECONOMIC EXPANSION 


303.5 Million/Year 


Salaries 


28.9 MilllonA-ear 


Tourism & Sales 


274.6 MilllonA'ear 





Projected construction costs tor the UPT tmd Elysian Fields park-and-ride facilities amount to $470,000 
tor each site. The Canal Boulevard and Convention Center sites would each require approximately 
$1,530,000. Thus, total construction costs tor all tour parking locations would be about $4,000,000. 



The projected total amount of capital coats for aU pi o p oaed improTementa-lneludinc the Canal and 
Loyola-Rampart light rail lines, the UPT atroetear maintenance facility, the Cemeteries transit 
terminal, fabrication or acquiaitlon of 38 atreetoara and eonatraotion of four park-and-ride lota-la 
approximately 880,500,000. Aaaomlng 80-peroent Federal fundinc, roughly 864,400,000 would be 
made available for the project by the Paderal Tranait Adminiatration. Thia would leave a local 



2789 



match requirement of S16.100.000 — or 83,220,000 a year for a five-year construction program. 

ECONOMIC BENEFITS 

The economic benefits which may be expected to accrue from the proposed Canal Street-CBD Street- 
car project fall Into two general categories. The first of these Includes benefits which would result 
from Increased employment directly related to construction and operation of the proposed transit 
Improvements. The second category includes benefits related to Increased employment and sales 
activity which would be expected to result from revitallzatlon of the Canal Street corridor. 

It has been estimated that construction of the proposed major transit capital improvements would 
generate approximately 28S jobs for the five-year duration of the project. This would increase total 
economic activity in the area by roughly $24 million annually. In addition to these construction- 
period jobs, approximately 55 new permanent positions-for operators, maintenance and adminis- 
trative personnel-would be created. The total economic impact of these ongoing jobs would be 
around $S million a year. 

Economic expansion in the Central Business District expected to result from revltalization of the 
Canal Street corridor will generate a projected 3,300 new Jobs. This represents a total increase in 
economic activity of approximately 8275 million per year attributable to the expanded tourism, 
business and retail sales which would be Indirectly stimulated by Implementation of the Canal 
Street and Loyola-Rampart streetcar lines. Thus, the short-term economic impact of the project 
would be an annual boost to the local economy of approximately 8300 million. Beyond the five-year 
construction period, a continuing economic Impact of roughly 8280 million a year may be expected 
to occur. 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 

The Canal Street-CBD Streetcar project Is a direct result of the efforts of business and community 
leaders to restore light rail transit service to the city's most important arterial thoroughfare. In order 
to maximize the effectiveness of business Interests, property owners and other Interested Individuals 
and groups in the CBD, Mayor Sidney Barthelemy formed the Canal Street Transit Coalition for the 
purpose of spearheading support for Implementation of the proposed transit improvements. The 
group held its inaugural meeting In the Pelican State Building on February 7, 1992. The meeting, 
hosted by the mayor, attracted an Impressive array of business and civic leaders who will be actively 
working to mobilize support for the restoration of streetcar service to Canal Street. 



2790 



Congressional Testimony 

Concerning the Need for Grant Assistance for Bus Purchiases 

I AM WAYNE A. DUPRB. I SERVE AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE REGIONAL TRANSIT 
AUTHORITY (RTA) IN NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA. I AM HERE TO TESTIFY ABOUT THE DIRE 
NEED THAT MY AGENCY HAS FOR FEDERAL FUNDS TO REPLACE INTERCITY BUSES. MY 
AGENCY. AS MOST ACROSS THE COUNTRY. IS HEAVILY DEPENDENT UPON FEDERAL FUND- 
ING FOR MOST CAPITAL PROJECTS. OUR LOCAL RESOURCES. IN THE FORM OF FAREBOX 
REVENUE, STATE SUBSIDIES, A 0NE<;ENT SALES TAX AND SCANT ADVERTISING REVENUE. 
PROVE INSUFFICIENT. YEAR AFTER YEAR. TO ALSO SUPPORT CAPITAL PROJECTS. 

THE RTA OPERATES WITH AN APPROXIMATE OPERATING BUDGET OF OVER SDCTY-FrVB MIL- 
LION DOLLARS ($65 MILUON). FEDERAL OPERATING ASSISTANCE PROVIDES SEVEN PER- 
CENT (7%); FAREBOX REVENUES ARE SIGNIFICANT AT FORTY-SIX PERCENT (46%); THE LOCAL 
SALES TAX CONTRIBUTES ABOUT FORTY PERCENT (40%); THE STATE OF LOUISIANA ABOUT 
SIX PERCENT (6%): AND ADVERTISING CONTRIBUTES ABOUT ONE PERCENT (1%). 

THE RTA HAS APPUED FOR GRANTS FROM THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION (FTA) 
AT THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO ASSIST IN THE PURCHASE OF ONE HUNDRED 
AND FOUR (104) TRANSIT COACHES. THE GRANT APPUCATION HAS BEEN UNDER CONSIDER- 
ATION BY THE FTA SINCE FEBRUARY. 1992. 

THE RTA NEEDS TO REPLACE ONE HUNDRED AND FOUR (104) VEHICLES BECAUSE OF THE 
FREQUENCY AND NATURE OF MECHANICAL AND OTHER OPERATIONAL FAILURES. DURING 
CALENDAR YEAR 1991. THE RTA EXPERIENCED AN AVERAGE OF FIVE THOUSAND EIGHTY 
ONE (5.081) MILES PER ROAD CALL FOR THE GENERAL MOTORS VEHICLES AND THREE 
THOUSAND, SDC HUNDRED AND THIRTY (3,630) FOR THE GRUMMAN FLXIBLES AND THREE 
THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED AND TEN (3,410) FOR THE CARPENTER VEHICLES. THIS EXCES- 
SIVE ROAD CALL A UTlVi ' I Y NEGATIVELY IMPACTS AN ALREADY STRAPPED OPERATING BUD- 
GET. DURING 1991, THE GRUMMAN FLXIBLB BUSES COST THE AGENCY AN AVERAGE OF 
EIGHTY-SDC CENTS ($.86) PER MILE. DinUNG THE SAME PERIOD, THE GENERAL MOTORS 
VEHICLES COST AN AVERAGE OF SIXTY-SIX CENTS ($.66) PER MILE AND THE CARPENTER 
VEHICLES COST ABOUT ONE DOLLAR AND SDCTEBN CENTS ($1.16) PER MILE. THE RTA'S 
SYSTEM AVERAGE WAS SIXTY-ONE CENTS ($.61) PER KOLE. 

THE RTA HAS ESTIMATED THAT. IN 1991. IT HAS COST THE AGENCY ABOUT SEVENTEEN 
THOUSAND DOLLAflS ($17,000) MORE ANNUALLY TO OPERATE THE GRUMMAN FLXIBLE FLEET 
THAN. FOR EXAMPLE, THE NEWER ORION V BUS. THIS IS BASED ON A FLEET AVERAGE 
MILEAGE OF THIRTY THOUSAND (30,000) PER FORTY FEET BUS. 

LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT THE TYPES OF MECHANICAL AND OTHER FAILURES THAT CONTRIB- 
UTE TO THE COSTS THAT I HAVE JUST MENTIONED. 

Rj A HIGH NUMBER OF REAR AXLE FAILURES DUB TO CRACKS OCCURRING IN THE GENERAL 
MOTORS RTS II BUSES: 

R) FAILED DOOR MECHANISMS THAT HAVE OUTLIVED THE USEFUL LIFE CYCLE: 

Rj ENGINES AND TRANSMISSIONS THAT HAVE BEEN OVERHAULED NUMEROUS TIMES. AND 
ARE UNABLE TO MEET OVERHAUL TOI£RANCB8. WITH IT BECOMING NECESSARY TO 
REPLACE MAJOR COMPONENTS: 



2791 



Rj REPEATED FRONT SUSPENSION PROBLEMS THAT ARE PRESENT WITH THE GRUMMAN 
FLXIBLES; 

[b SHORT BRAKE LIFE DUE TO LACK OF BRAKE RETARDERS ON THE TARGETED BUSES; 

Pj EXTENSIVE ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS IN GRUMMAN FLXIBLES THAT ARE GENERALLY AS- 
SOCIATED WITH EXHAUST STACK PROXIMITY TO ELECTRICAL HARNESSES; 

Rj EXTENSIVE DETERIORATION OF THE FLOORS DUE TO WATER DAMAGE AND CRACKS IN 
WHEEL WELLS; 

Ri 0\'ER NINETY PERCENT (90%) SCARRED BUS WINDOWS IN GENERAL MOTORS BUSES; 

Rj THE BUSES HAVE A DETROIT DIESEL 8V71N POWER PLANT, THIS ENGINE OFFERS THE 
LOWEST FUEL MILEAGE AND. THEREFORE. THE HIGHEST ASSOCIATED OPERATING COST. 
FURTHERMORE. THE EMISSIONS FROM THIS ENGINE ARE AT 1979 TO 1981 STANDARDS. 
AND CONTRIBUTE TO AIR POLLUTION AT A HIGHER RATE THAN THE LATEST ENGINES; 

Ri TO MEET THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT REQUIREMENTS. THE RTA WILL EQUIP 
THESE BUSES WITH WHEELCHAIR UFTS AND OTHER DEVICES AND APPOINTMENTS ON 
THE VEHICLE; AND 

R) FAILURES FREQUENTLY OCCUR WITH ROLL-TYPE DESTINATION SIGNS AND THESE SHOULD 
BE REPLACED WITH ELECTRONIC SIGNS. 

THE VEHICLES PROPOSED FOR REPLACEMENT WITH FEDERAL FUNDING HAVE MET THE 
FTAS PREVIOUS REQUIREMENTS CONCERNING USEFUL UFE CRITERIA OF TWELVE (12) 
YEARS FOR FORTY FEET (40 FEET) VEHICLES AND SEVEN (7) YEARS FOR THE THIRTY FEET 
(30 FEET) VEHICLES. THE REVISED FTA POUCY IN THIS AREA WOULD ALLOW MID-UFE 
REPLACEMENT. 

THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS HAS TRADITIONALLY RECEIVED EXCELLENT TRANSIT SERVICE, 
CHARACTERIZED BY EXTENSIVE COVERAGE. EFFICIENT OPERATION. AND REASONABLE 
FARES. THE PERIODIC INFUSION OF CAPITAL EQUIPMENT WILL ASSIST IN ?V1AINTAINING 
THE HIGH QUALITY OF TRANSIT SERVICE. THE UPGRADING OF THE TRANSIT BUS FLEET IS A 
PREREQUISITE FOR CONTINUED QUALITY SERVICE. 

THE REPLACEMENT VEHICLES WILL AID THE RTA IN REALIZING SHORT TERM TRANSIT 
IMPROVEMENT GOALS SUCH AS: 

ft) IMPROVING TRANSIT SERVICE: NEW ORLEANS IS A TRANSIT-DEPENDENT CITY. WE HAVE 
A HIGH INDIGENT POPULATION. HOWEVER. ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES ARE ACCESSED 
THROUGH TRANSIT UTILIZATION. THEREFORE. THE RTA MUST BE ABLE TO PROVIDE 
RELIABLE SERVICE. IN ADDITION. TO EMPLOYING EFFICIENT MAINTENANCE PRACTICES. 
NEW EQUIPMENT IS ALSO VITAL TO RELIABLE OPERATIONS. 

Rj IMPROVING TRANSIT IMAGE: IT FOLLOWS THAT THE QUALITY OF SERVICE IMPACTS THE 
IMAGE OF THE TRANSIT SYSTEM. A POSITIVE IMAGE HELPS TO RETAIN CURRENT 

RIDERS AND ATTRACT NEW RIDERS. 



2792 



Ri INCREASING RIDERSHIP: THESE VEHICLES WILL ASSIST THE RTA IN ATTRACTING NEW 
RIDERS DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE SYSTEM WILL BE MORE RELIABLE AND THE VE- 
HICLES WILL ASSIST IN PROJECTING A POSITIVE IMAGE. 

|)) PROVIDING FOR PATRON COMFORTS: THE NEW VEHICLES WILL HAVE TEMPERATURE 
CONTROLS. ELEMENTS FOR A SMOOTHER RIDE. AND AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT 
REQUIREMENTS. SUCH AS WHEELCHAIR MECHANICAL UFTS. THE "KNEEUNG" FEATURE. 
SIGNAGE, PUBUC ADDRESS SYSTEMS. AND SO ON. THESE FEATURES SHOULD MAKE FOR 
A COMFORTABLE RIDE ON THE RTA SYSTEM. 

\h EMPLOYING TRANSIT AS A TOOL TO SOLVE URBAN PROBLEMS: THE NEW ORLEANS 
ECONOMY HAS SUFFERED DURING THE PREVIOUS DECADE DUE TO ITS HEAVY RELIANCE 
ON THE OIL INDUSTRY, PORT ACTTVITIES. AND TOURISM. ALTHOUGH THE ECONOMIC 
RECESSION IS WANING, THE ECONOMY REMAINS SLUGGISH. THE RTA BELIEVES THAT 
RELIABLE, EFFICIENT TRANSIT ASSISTS THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS IN ECONOMIC DE- 
VELOPMENT ACTIVITIES: IN THE REDUCTION OF AIR AND NOISE POLLUTION AND TRAFFIC 
REDUCTION; AND SOCIO- ECONOMIC ACTTVITIES, SUCH AS SERVICE TO CENTERS OF EM- 
PLOYMENT AND SOCIAL AND CULTURAL ACTTVITIES. 

THESE ARE JUST A FEW OF THE CHAULENOES THAT THE RTA AND OTHER TRANSFF SYSTEMS 
MUST MEET ON A DAILY BASIS WITH UMTTED RESOURCES. THE RTA EMPLOYS EFFICIENT 
MAINTENANCE PRACTICES THAT HAS ALLOWED US TO KEEP THESE VEHICLES IN OPEFIA- 
TION; HOWEVER. BECAUSE OF THE HIGH UTIUZATION OF THE SYSTEM, THIS EQUIPMENT 
HAS REACHED THE POINT OF DIMINISHING RETURN. WE ARE AT THE JUNCTURE WHERE 
REPLACEMENT-AND NOT REPAIR-IS MORE EFFICIENT. 

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HOLDS THE KEY TO OUR ABIUTY TO PROVIDE CONTINUED 
SERVICE WITH NEW EQUIPMENT. 

THE RTA NEEDS APPROXIMATELY TWENTY MILUON, EIGHT TTUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLAIIS 
($20.8 MILLION) IN FEDEFIAL FUNDS TO REPLACE ONE HUNDRED AND FOUR (104) VEHICLES. 
WE BEUEVE THAT THIS INVESTMENT OF TWENTY MILUON EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND 
DOLLARS ($20.8 MILUON) IS A PRUDENT, EFFICIENT, AND EFFECTTVE INVESTMENT IN THE 
NEW ORLEANS TRANSTF SYSTEM. 

WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST. 



2793 

ORLANDO, FL 
STATEMENT OF THE GREATER ORLANDO AVIATION AUTHORITY 

The Greater Orlando Aviation Authority (GOAA) considers it a distinct privilege to submit 
testimony to the Senate Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee and deeply appreciates the 
opportunity to provide a comprehensive report on the status of Florida's leading gateway, the 
Orlando International Airport (OIA). The Airport is located on nearly 15,000 acres and is the 
second largest landmass airport in the United States. Identified as an "Origin and Destination" 
airport, 90% of all passengers arriving at Orlando International Airport require some type of 
intermodal transportation. 

Orlando International Airport has experienced unprecedented growth in the past eleven years, 
and is ranked the 18th busiest airport in the nation. In 1992, domestic passenger traffic 
increased by 13.3%, and international traffic increased 27.5%. During this same period, more 
than 21.1 million passengers used the airport as compared with only 6 million in 1981. This 
exceptional growth rate has significantly impacted the development of the airport, and has 
required the Authority to undertake extensive capacity improvements. In fourteen years, 
Orlando International Airport construction costs were $1.5 billion. The Authority was required 
to issue revenue bonds to finance most of these capacity improvements. The resulting annual 
debt service of $83 million severely limits the ability of the Authority to finance future airfield 
development. The growth and development of the Orlando International Airport has served as 
a strong catalyst for the Central Florida economy. In 1992, the Orlando International Airport 
generated a $5.4 billion economic impact in Central Florida. Approximately 10,500 jobs are 
directly associated with the airport. International and domestic tourists contributed $3.9 billion 
to the Orlando metropolitan economy. As the world's most popular tourist destination, Central 
Florida substantially attracts foreign currency to assist in the balance of trade. According to an 
independent Peat Marwick study, within the next five years, total passenger traffic is expected 
to increase by 61% and international activities will increase 148%. In 1998 nearly 30 million 
passengers are expected to use Orlando International Airport. 

In an effort to satisfy future aviation demands in Central Florida, the Orlando International 
Airport has developed a $640 million Airport Capital Plan (ACP). The plan specifically focuses 
on projects to improve airfield capacity and access to the airport. Three critical elements of this 
plan include the total rehabilitation of Runway 18L/36R, construction of mid-crossfield taxiway 
bridges for vehicle/rail traffic, and the widening of South Access Road from two lanes to six. 
At present, the Greater Orlando Aviation Authority has requested the FAA to issue a four-year 
"Letter of Intent" for $250 million to partially fund the ACP. This amount represents the 
federal share of project costs, and cannot be reduced by the collection of Passenger Facility 
Charges (PFC), previously committed to other projects. 

•On August 17, 1992, the Greater Oriando Aviation Authority requested the FAA to issue a 
"Letter of Intent," which would obligate future entitlement/discretionary funding. In addition, 
a Preapplication (OIA-93-02) was filed with the Airport District Office (ADO) on November 25, 
1992 in anticipation of possible FAA funding (copy enclosed). 

The Greater Orlando Aviation Authority is hopeful the FAA will approve our "Letter of Intent." 
Therefore, it is essential the FAA budget is sufficiently funded to award grants in accordance 
with the enclosed construction schedule. 

The economic benefits derived as the result of implementing the airport's capacity improvement 
program include the creation of hundreds of construction jobs and to generate financial 
incentives to develop new permanent employment opportunities for the community. Orlando 
International Airport is strategically located and serves as a pivotal point for international 
commerce and trade. The further development of the airport will attract foreign investment due 
to its unique ability to offer large tracts of land for industrial use. The construction of a state-of- 
the-art USDA Plant Inspection Station and Perishable Handling Center at Oriando International 
Airport reveal the true potential of the airport. 



2794 



ORLANDO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 




Photograph Dated: January, 1993 



2795 



StCURt 00*0 

MW TtRWHAL 
SUPPORT ABE> 



RUHWAT I81.-36R 
*N0 ASSOCIATED 
TAKMArS 



IwtSI SOE 



PJ*WP Rti^AeiL'TATWX 



I I AX WAT TO FUTURE ] 
AtCRT ARt* 



IAlCRT AREA APftON 
NPROIMCNT 



SOUTH CXTCNV^ I 



I SOUTH TEPU»«L 
AJRSrOe 3 APRON 




I LAND 

lACOUTsmoN 



ORLANDO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS 



e 



MAI B^ mi 



9»»9*inJm 



2796 



Oiiando International Airport 

One Airport Boulevard 

Orlando. Florida 32827-4399 

(407) 82S-200I 



November 25 1992 



Mr. Charles E. Blair 

Manager 

Orlando Airports District Office 

Federal Aviation Administration 

9677 Tradeport Drive 

Suite 130 

Orlando, Fl . 32827-5397 

Re: Prc-Appli cation for Federal Assistance 
Request for Letter of Intent 
Pre-Application No, OIA-93-02 
Airport Improvement Projects for 
Orlando International Airport 



Dear Mr. Blair: 

In accordance with our previous discussions and our letter of November 
10, 1992, regarding a "Letter of Intent", enclosed is an Original and 
Two (2)" copies of a Pre-Application for Federal Assistance for 
construction of those projects. 

It is respectfully requested that a Letter of Intent be issued in the 
amount of $250,000,000 to the City of Orlando/Greater Orlando Aviation 
Authority at your earliest convenience. 

If you have any further questions or require additional information, 
please contact us at your earliest opportunity. 

Sincerely, 




^George *. Set 

Assistant Executive director 
Engineering and ConstVuction 

eb 

Enclosures: As noted 

cc: Mr. Michael J. Martin, F/DOT 
A. Gordon Arkin, Esq. 

Messrs. Glass, Jennings, Schandel, Brancheau, GOAA 
Mrs. H. Riley, Acting Finance Dir., GOAA 



2797 



APPLICATION FOn 
FEDERAL A^^SISTANCE 



t. r**t c 

a 



a 



mm.ttAA.oo*t 



n/25/92 



a. ftAfi HaLiji ti «« nftfT 



OlA-93-02 



City of Orlando 



One Airport boulevard 

Orange County 

Orlando, Florida 32d27-4399 



Greater OrlanHn Avi.iUnn Aii>hnrity 



Na**** •»« t«M 



George H. Seel, P.E. 
(407) 825-3528 



^orxM o««m»»c«no« wwsfls vow*' 



|b |9 l - fTl Olo I 3l 9| 6| I 



ft. rr^t c •^•vCAnoi* 



O *«•- □ Cor«» 








Federal Aviation Adinirifstration 
Orlando Airports District Office 



I 2 I 1 I I 6 I "■ "••=»"*»«''"-■'>' •'"vti'"^ 

(SEE ATTACHED) 



rms. Airport Iniprovetnent Prograw 



IL AAMAJ ATTtCTTV ■* »*OJ«CT •€•»•■. CM^M^I. fUMt. *« f 



Orange, Seminole & Osceola Counties 



\ 



12/92 



12/97 



Fifth 



Eleventh 



»!. t»TW»Ar»B »u«w««l 



250,000,000' 



83,333,330-' 



•t. m ***\nAn<>* tuftjfct to BTftf* I 



I DacvTTwT voat tnri > ^jcim 



t J '*•$ •<>eA<>^okn>«A'>^jcATQN WAS luoc «v»*>»je to n< 
TTATt cncunvt ooo€K lun poocesj ton "cview cw 



» "O O pooc««u o Mot c u » imD rr to mn 

□ on *noanjU4 HAS •<JT KIM SOJECnD ft UAH fon BEVCW 



333,333,333 



•C '•• 



Q- 



■ «. to r**« AArt o» w« <«^F<*vnna a*^ sci.** *ix tt*tA m nM« &wvieAn»«< 






Gooroe W. SppI . P.E. 



• »«^ Assistant Executive Oirec ei''' " ' ' "»'•*- 

ino a#d r.nrv^fnirUnn ' (rtn?) 825-352B 




11/25/92 



2798 



/ 



PREAPPLICATION FOR FEDERAL ASSrSTANCE 



PART ri 



I. Does Ibis issislmce itcved lecuiie Sl^te. local, leiionsi of olhei pnoiilr iJlini? . 



.Yes XX No 



7. Oocs Ihi5 tssistance icnui'e Stale or local, advisory, educational or hcallh clearance'. 



-Yes 



-Mo 



3. Does Ihtj ajsislance rccjiicsl require Clearrn|house review' . 



.Yes. 



.No 



4. Does Ihis assistance reniesi require Stale, local, refional or otlin plannin| approval?. 



Yes. 



.No 



5. Is ttie proposed project covered by an approved comprehensive pl^n?. 



Yes. 



.No 



Airport Master Plan 



5. Will tbc assistance rciiucsled serve a Federal installation'. 



.Yes. 



.No 



7. Will Ihe assistance requested be on Federal land or inslallalion'. 



Yes 



No 



8. Witt tbe assistance rc<!uested have an eltect on the envirenment'. 



-Yes. 



'to FONSI'S WILL BE ON FILE 
WIT H FAA= 



9. (Till the assistance reouestcd cause the displaciimeni ol individuals, lamities, businesses, or farms? . 



.Yes. 



-No 



10. Is there other retaled assistance lor Ihispnject previous, pendinf, or anticipated'. 



.Yes. 



.No 



PART III _ PROJECT BUDGET 


reief *L c* r*L03 

Muwoen 

I.I 


Trl>c or AISISTAMCC 

LOAN, CnANT, tTC. 

1^1 


n«fT suocev •caioo 
l.t 


• •(.•nee O' o^OitCT 
•Nl 


TOTAL 


1- 20.106 


Letter of 
Intent 






$250,000,000 i 


2. 










3. 










t. 










5, 










«. Total Fedeial Conlribulion 


J 


$ 


S 250,000,000 


7. Slate Conliibution 








1. Applicant Contribution 




• 


83,333,333 


). Otiiei Contributions 








10. Totals 


S 


S 


S 333,333,333 


PART IV _ PitOCRAM NARRATIVE STATEMENT 

ATTACHED ' 

' 



FAA fm^m SIOOJO l»-TJ1 SUPCnsCOCS rAA POMM SIOO-S 



Pe««3 



2799 



Attachment 3 



CertiEication for Contracts, Grants, Loans. and Cooperative 

Agreements 

The undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and 

belief, that: 



(1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, 
by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing 
or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, 
a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an 
employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding 
of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the 
making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative 
agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or 
modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan or cooperative 
agreement . 

(2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been 
paid or will belaid to any person for influencing or attempting 
to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of 
Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a 
Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, 
loan, or cooperative agreement, the unders.igned shall complete and 
submit Standard Form-LLL, "Disclosure of Lobby Activities," in 
accordance with its instructions. 

(3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this 
certification be included in the award documents for all subawards 
at all tiers (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts 
under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all 
subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. 

This certification is a material representation of fact upon which 
reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. 
Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or 
entering into this transaction imposed by section 135?., title 31, 
U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification 
shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than SIC, 000 and 
not more tl^an SlOO , 000 y<or ^each such failure. 



Signed 




Dated 



11/25/92 



ed .Represe.ntative 



2800 







o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


n 


n 




UJ 


o 


ir> 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


00 


rj 




cc 


o 


rvj 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


r> 




< 


o 


^' 


o 


o 


o 


d 


d 


r-' 


in 


d 


d 


d 


in 


f— 


r> 




X 


in 


in 


in 


o 


o 


o 


o 


■"J- 


<>j 


o 


o 


o 


r^ 


't 







(A 


fM 


r* 


r^ 


m 


o 


(N 


in 


to 


n 


in 


<M 


o 


r- 


in 


n 




o 


00 


n' 


ri 


<fi 




■vy 


CO 


<N 


«y 


■«v 


vy 


r-^ 


vy 


r-' 


en 




</> 




■i/y 


•«> 


■vy 






^ 








«v 




fS 


00 






•to 










•»V 


«>- 












vy 


■«> 




o 





































o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


O 


O 


o 


O 


O 


O 


o 


O 


O 






o 


in 


o 


o 


O 


O 


o 


o 


O 


o 


O 


o 


o 


in 







UJ 


o 


^. 


o 


o 


O 


O 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


CM 







cc 

< 


o 


r) 


o 


o 


o 


d 


d 


to 


in 


d 


d 


d 


in 


fO 


d 




IT) 


in 


in 


o 


o 


o 


o 


tN 


r> 


o 


o 


o 


fM 


(M 







X 


r^ 


rvi 


«NI 


in 


o 


to 


in 


CD 


O) 


in 


to 


o 


in 


to 







W3 


rt 






(T) 


r> 


v> 


d 


r*" 


■vy 


r- 


«v 


fO 


■vy 


^" 


d 




u. 




5 


•«> 


vy 


o 




Tt 
«» 


■vy 




•*V 




«> 




to 

■vy 


in 
(M 
■vy 


>• 




O 


O 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


O 


O 


O 


o 


o 


o 


n 


fO 


H 




O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


n 


CO 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


n 


m 


O 


</) 

O 
O 


o 


in 


o 


o 


o 


d 


d 


^" 


d 


d 


d 


d 


d 


^" 





o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


to 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


to 


n 


n 


o 

CO 


o 
in 


o 
in 


o 
to 


o 


00 


o 


in 
d 


<n 


o 


CO 
vy 


o 




to' 


ri 




_J 


CO 


in 




IN 


■oy 




in 


in 


vy 


vy 




«y 




00 


n 


>- 
CO 


< 
o 


•<» 


<n- 


•«» 


w 






•«> 


</y 












vy 


n 


o 


H 
































































UJ 


































-) 


































o 


































DC 


































Q. 


































»- 


































z 


































UJ 


































1- 


































z 


































— 






to 




























u. 






_i 




























O 






Ul 

Z 




























OC 






z 

t 

z 
























-J 




ID 




























< 




t 


tfj 


























z 




UJ 

-1 


Z 

o 

t 




g 

CO 

z 
< 

a. 








z 
o 






< 

to 




)- 






Ul 




-J 
< 




u 


z 
g 


Q 






< 






^ 


Z 

UJ 


X 




cc 

> 







</3 


Ul 


< 


z 
o 


1- 


-1 






t 


CC 


5 


h- 




z 

UJ 

OL 
Ul 
OC 
Q. 

Ul 






UJ 

D 


< 

H 
-J 
CD 
< 


Ul 

O 

CC 
CO 


O 
en 

to 
to 

Ul 

O 


UJ 

Z 

o 


CO 

< 

X 

Ul 
CC 

z 
o 




> 
< 

X 

< 


z 

H 
OC 

O 

Q. 


< 

(- 
oc 

Ul 

_l 

< 


UJ 

> 

O 
cc 

Q. 


3 
O 
to 

z 
g 










X 


> 


o 


to 


to 




(- 


Ul 


tu 




to 




H 








Ul 


< 


< 


z 


z 






Q 


cc 


z 


z 












cc 
cc 

n 

13 


X 

< 


X 

t- 

Zi 

o 

CO 


UJ 

H 
X 

Ul 

Q 


Ul 

1- 
X 

Ul 

O 


oc 

Q. 
< 

60 




o 

_J 

UJ 

u. 
to 
to 


H 

Q 
< 

O 

oc 

UJ 

oc 


3 
H 

u. 
O 


o 
cc 

Q. 
< 

CC 

< 
cc 


Ul 

H 
X 

UJ 

c 

o 


u. 
u. 
cc 

< 


to 

— 1 

< 

z 

5 








CO 

>- 
< 


o 

— 1 

UJ 

u. 
in 


Ul 

z 

fi 

cc 


< 

o 
cc 

O 


< 

o 

oc 
O 

a 


to 

lU 

o 

to 

cc 


Q 


O 
oc 
o 

X 

1- 


»- 
>• 
< 


t 

> 

< 


Ul 

a 
to 

1- 

lO 
UJ 


cc 

Ul 

>- 

X 








z 


O 


Z) 


cc 


cc 


Z 


CC 


o 


X 


UJ 


X 


Z) 








3 


cc 


o 

u. 


< 


< 


^ 


O 


Ul 


< 


-J 


< 











CC 


a 


o 


o 


< 


z 


to 


1- 


< 


h- 


to 








•" 


CM 


"fO 


^ 


in 

_ 


to 


r^ 


00 


m 


o 


f 




n 


Tt 





2801 



RUNWAY 18L/36R REHABILITATION 




Project Description: 

Runway 18L736R will be rehabilitated by 
replacing portions of the pavement, improv- 
ing drainage, upgrading airfield lighting, and 
repairing existing pavement as required on 
this 12,000 foot long runway. This Project is 
similar to work previously performed on 
Runway 1 8R/36L, a runway of similar age. 

Justification; 

This runway was a part of McCoy Air Force 
Base before it was developed as the Air- 
port. This runway is approximately thirty 
years old and has been overlaid several 
times. Because of its age and heavy use, 
this runway requires rehabilitation and 
upgrading to preserve and enhance its 
safety and capacity. This project is similar 
to work recently performed on Runway 1 8R/ 
36L which was originally constructed at the 
same time as Runway 18Ly36R. In 
response to the Authority's Pre-Application 
for Federal Assistance, the FAA determined 
on May 7, 1992, that this Project was eligi- 
ble under the Airport Improvements Pro- 
gram 



2802 



MID-CROSSFIELD TAXIWAY BRIDGES 




ARFF 



Project Description; 

Additional taxiway bridges for. aircraft using the mid-crossfield taxiways will be con- 
structed to provide access between the north and south terminal complexes for north 
and south bound automobile traffic, terminal-to-terminal AGT system, railroad corridors 
and rent-a-car transport. 



■Tiistification: 

These bridges are required to provide access between the north and south terminal com- 
plexes while maintaining the ability for aircraft to taxi from the east runways, 181-/36R 
and 18R/36L, and the east airfield runways. 17/35 and the proposed fourth runway. 



2803 



FOUR LANE SOUTH ACCESS ROAD 




Project Description; 

The South Access Road provides public 
access from the south between the Airport 
terminal loop road and the Southern Con- 
nector portion of the Beltway roadway sys- 
tem being constructed by the Orlando- 
Orange County Expressway Authority. This 
phase of the project provides an additional 
two-lane public roadway, drainage and utili- 
ties, and mitigation, if required to comply 
with applicable regulation(s). 

.lustification: 

The Southern Connector will connect to the 
Beeline east of the Airport, go south of the 
Airport, and then proceed west to Highway 
535 and Interstate 4 near Lake Buena 
Vista. This project will provide airline pas- 
sengers and other airport users and tenants 
with additional direct access to the South- 
ern Connector, which will: 

1 . increase airport ground access capacity 
by providing a second means of access 
to the terminal, 

2. increase safety by alleviating antici- 
pated future congestion at the Beeline- 
Highway 436 interchange. 

3. shorten the travel time of passengers to 
their ultimate destinations, which in 
many cases are to locations south of the 
City of Orlando, e.g. the Walt Disney 
World and Kissimmee areas. 



The additional lanes of this roadway will be required to accommodate the increase in 
traffic associated with the anticipated increased use of the South Access Road. 



2804 



CARGO ROAD EXTENSION - EAST 




Project Description; 

The Cargo Road system will be extended east and north to improve circulation on- 
airport, to provide access to additional land in the Northeast Terminal Support Area and 
to provide an additional connection with the Beeline Expressway. The improvements will 
include associated roadways, sitework, drainage and utilities. 



.Instification; 

To maintain adequate capacity in the loop road system serving the terminal for 
passenger circulation and to improve safety and security at the Airport, public passenger 
traffic has been separated from Airport support traffic, i.e. employees, deliveries and 
support operations. This project will allow Cargo Road access to new areas and to the 
Beeline east of the already congested intersection of the Beeline and Highway 436. 



2805 



CARGO ROAD EXTENSION - WEST 




Project Description: 

The Cargo Road and secure road systems will be extended to the west and north to 
improve circulation on-airport and provide improved access to land in the Northwest Ter- 
minal Support Area. In addition, this project will allow the development of a secure road 
system in the northwest terminal support area, converting sections of the present Cargo 
Road to a secure road system. The improvements will include associated roadways, 
sitework, drainage and utilities. 



Justification: 

To maintain adequate capacity in the loop road system serving the terminal for passen- 
ger circulation and to improve safety and security at the Airport, public passenger traffic 
has been separated from support traffic, i.e. employees, deliveries and support opera- 
tions. This section of Cargo Road is required to facilitate that travel. 



2806 



AIRSIDES 1 & 3 RAMP REHABILITATION 




Project Description; 

This project provides for rehabilitation of 
portions of the ramps at Airsides 1 and 3. 
The areas identified for the corrective work 
are predominately on the west side of the 
respective aprons, closest to Taxiway "C". 
The work will be sequenced to minimize the 
impact on aircraft operations on each 
respective ramp. The work will be a combi- 
nation of concrete slab replacement, pres- 
sure grouting under existing slabs, and 
resealing of the slab joints. 

■histification; 

Certain limited sections of the airside ramps 
will require rehabilitation to maintain the 
serviceability and safety of the ramp. 
These ramps are a portion of the original 
Orlando International Airport. 



2807 



LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM 




Project Description: 

In late 1987 the Greater Orlando Aviation 
Authority had established a land acquisition 
budget based upon their master planned 
development. This budget has escalated 
from $48 to $54 million, due primarily to the 
rapid escalation of land values around the 
Orlando International Airport. 

Three years ago, the Authority requested an 
$18 million Letter of Intent for the lands 
needed for the East Airfield Development. 
The FAA issued a Letter of Intent and has 
recently funded $9 million of the $18 million. 
It is estimated that when final judgements 
are entered in all of the condemnation suits, 
the final land cost of the subject properties 
will exceed $30 million. Based upon the 
$30 million amount, the Authority requests 
that the FAA increase their Letter of Intent 
funding from $18 million to $22.5 million 
(75% of the $30 million). With $9 million 
already committed, this leaves a balance of 
$13.5 million FAA funding required to guar- 
antee maximum FAA participation in the 
Letter of Intent land acquisition program. 

In addition to these acquisitions, the Author- 
ity acquired an additional 3,475.5 acres of 
property for airport development and mitiga- 
tion. There has been no FAA participation 
in any of these acquisitions, which were 
consistent with the current Airport Master 
Plan. 



2808 



NORTH CROSSFIELD TAXIWAY PLANNING 




Project Description; 

Expansion of the taxiway system with a North Crossfield Taxiway is required to accom- 
modate the forecasted increase in airfield activity and reduce ground movement of air- 
craft related to "direction of flight" runway usage. Before final design and construction of 
the North Crossfield Taxiway can commence, the Authority must (1) prepare a prelimi- 
nary plan to establish the taxiway alignment, locations of the related structures and their 
environmental impacts, (2) if required by regulatory agencies, develop an environmental 
mitigation plan, and (3) complete the environmental reviews and permitting process for 
the taxiway and the related structures as required by State and Local regulatory agen- 
cies. This Project includes the pre-construction activities to complete the environmental 
permitting and planning for the taxiway. The decision to undertake final design and con- 
struction and the determination of sources of funding for this work will be made after ini- 
tial phases (1 through 3 above) are completed and traffic reaches appropriate levels. 



Justification: 

The forecast growth in passenger traffic will lead to increases in the number of aircraft 
landing at the Airport. With two runways to the west and two to the east (one operational 
and one under construction), there will be a significant increase in the number of aircraft 
crossing the airfield. The existing crossfield taxiways are convenient to serve the south- 
erly Airsides 3 and 4. The development of the North Crossfield Taxiway will provide com- 
parable service to Airside 1 and the future Airside 2. When the existing taxiway and the 
North Crossfield Taxiway are all in place, Air Traffic Control will have more efficient 
means to balance and distribute runway loadings and airfield ground movements 
between the west airfield, the east airfield, and the airsides, thereby increasing the 
capacity of the Airport. In addition, the FAA-ATCT will have additional flexibility in sched- 
uling aircraft arrivals and departures in a manner consistent with their noise abatement 
goals. 



2809 



SECURE ROAD 
TRADEPORT TO NORTHWEST TERMINAL SUPPORT AREA 




Project Description; 

In accordance with the Airport's Master Plan, this two lane road will provide a means to 
travel on a secure roadway between the northwest terminal support area (NWTSA) and 
the Tradeport. The road will be constructed on the AOA, beginning at the secure road 
north of the Tradeport, north to the Beeline Expressway, turn east going immediately 
south of the current property fence, located adequately north of runways 18L/36R and 
18R/36L to ensure the vehicular traffic on the road will not interfere with existing and 
planned airfield equipment. 

■Tustification; 

Presently, traffic between the northwest terminal support area (NWTSA) and the Trade- 
port is required to either go off the AOA and travel via the unsecure public roads, or to 
travel the secure roads located to the southwest of the north terminal complex. With the 
planned further development of the northwest terminal support area, a secure road is 
necessary to provide an expeditious route for travel to and from the Tradeport. 



2810 



TAXIWAY TO FUTURE ALERT AREA 




Project Description; 

In accordance with the Airport Master Plan 
and the approved Airport Layout Plan, this 
project will construct a taxiway from Taxi- 
way "A" to the future alert area (or airside 
area) located north of the current Tradeport 
South Airside Area. 

liistification: 

This taxiway is required to provide aircraft 
access to the future airside area as the 
Tradeport area will continue to expand to 
support the anticipated growth in cargo at 
the Airport. 



2811 



ALERT AREA APRON IMPROVEMENTS 




Project Description; 

This project will construct ackjitional apron 
and taxiway in the old air force base's "Alert 
Area", also known as the Tradeport South 
Airside Area. This project will provide 
approximately twice the apron/taxiway pre- 
viously attached to this "sawtooth" con- 
structed area. 

■Instification; 

In order to better utilize this area for future 
expansion in the Tradeport area, the exist- 
ing sawtooth apron/taxiway configuration 
must be "squared off" to accommodate air- 
craft movement. 



2812 



TAXIWAY«C" SOUTH 




Project Description: 

Taxjway *C" is to be extended south from 
the mjd-crossfietd taxiways to the southern 
end of Runway 18L/36R, parallel to Taxiway 
"B". 

.Iiistification: 

Extending this Taxiway will provide for 
improved aircraft access to Runway 18U 
36R and is consistent with the Airport Mas- 
ter Plan and Airport Layout Plan (ALP) 



2813 



WEST SIDE ARFF 




Project Descriptinni 

This project will construct a two-bay satellite 
Airaaft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) 
facility in the West Ramp area. The facility 
will house one quick response vehicle, a re- 
supply tanker, a medical unit and associ- 
ated facilities. 

.Tiistification: 

A full Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting 
(ARFF) facility is required on the west side 
of Orlando International Airport in order to 
enhance the response time and require- 
ments of FAR Part 139. This action is war- 
ranted by marginal response times to meet 
the FAA three minute requirements to Run- 
ways 18R/36L. The consistency required in 
meeting this response time is hampered at 
times due to the weather patterns experi- 
enced in Central Florida. Severe thunder- 
storms that typically occur during spring, 
summer, and fall months obstruct vision and 
cause dangerous delays. 

After carefully studying the West Airfield 
area, the location of this station was deter- 
mined in order to optimize response acces- 
sibility to the entire area. This station was 
also a major part of the corrective action 
enacted on March 15, 1992 and reported to 
FAA Certifications Branch Airports Division, 
Atlanta, Georgia by the Greater Orlando 
Aviation Authority Executive Director on 
February 26, 1992. 



Additional justification for the Westfield Station is based upon the extensive cargo han- 
dling and fueling operations that occur in this area. 



2814 



SOUTH TERMINAL SITE 
ENVIRONMENTAL PREPARATION 




Project Description; 

Program development as well as the first 
phases of preliminary planning to establish 
the locations of structures, taxiways and 
their environmental impacts, including envi- 
ronmental reviews, assessments, permit- 
ting and mitigation, if any, will be initiated 
under this project. In addition, initial site 
preparation for the landside terminal and 
one airside terminal would begin once all 
prerequisite requirements have been met. 

■Tiistification: 

It is anticipated that the north terminal com- 
plex will continue to adequately process the 
forecast passenger traffic for several 
years. However, the known capacity of the 
north terminal complex, coupled with the 
long lead time associated with the develop- 
ment of the south terminal complex, dictate 
that work on this new terminal be initiated 
on a phased basis as justified by passenger 
traffic forecasts. 



2815 




2816 




2817 




2818 




2819 

THE OSCAR PROJECT 

STATEMENT OF GLENDA E. HOOD, MAYOR 

The City's policy is that OSCAR should neither detract from, nor reduce 
the funding available to, the regional LYNX system. We have identified 
entirely separate sources of capital and operating funding for dovymtown 
circulation. In fact, the presence of a downtown circulator strengthens 
the regional transit system by boosting ridership to downtovm. 

Other cities have experienced financial difficulties when their new rail 
projects drained operating funds from their existing transit services. 
We will not repeat this mistake. Rather, we have ensured that the 
regional transit service will continue to have adequate funding for 
operations, maintenance, and routine capitalization even as we add 
new components, such as OSCAR, to the system. 

A Carefully-Planned Project 

While many cities have chosen to expand their transit systems by 
building expensive new regional rail corridors, Orlando intends to 
move incrementally, making capital investments cautiously and in 
response to observed user demand. 

OSCAR is not intended as the first leg of a regional rail system. Rather, 
it is a stand-alone activity center circulator. Of course, it is being 
planned to facilitate direct interchange of passengers with our regional 
bus transit network at its downtovm terminal. 

We have also ensured that the route layout and station locations are 
planned in the context of a future multimodal system. If Orlando 
develops a rail transit system in the future, it will directly interconnect, 
and trade passengers with, OSCAR. In fact, we are looking so far into 
the future that one of our key station locations is being plaimed with an 
eye to the possible construction of an intercity Florida High Speed Rail 
system, should that ongoing effort by the State of Florida succeed. 

However, none of those possible future additions to the transportation 
network has been included in our ridership forecasts. Our staff and 
consultants have been instructed to use conservative estimates in 
forecasting patronage and not to use questionable assumptions about 
future events or trends. 



2820 



When we forecast that OSCAR will carry 4,600 daily passengers in the 
first year of operations (1997), that should be viewed in the context of 
the 1,800 passengers we are already carrying every day in 1993, up from 
900 in 1991. Although downtown Orlando employment is expected to 
double to 70,000 by 2010, we are confident of the ridership forecasts even 
if actual growth is substantially lower than predicted. 

We are aware of the recent experience in this country with transit 
investment performance and are determined not to repeat the errors of 
the past. Many dties are attempting to use transit improvements to 
leverage private sector development and thereby foster employment 
growth. By contrast, Orlando is trying to meet the needs of a growing 
employment base by providing useful, efficient transportation. 

The Proposed Federal Role 

OSCAR is one of the projects identified in and specifically authorized by 
the 1991 ISTEA legislation. Congress has already appropriated fui^ding 
in both 1991 and 1992 for the project. The $2.5 million in Section 3 
funding you have provided over the past two years is being combined 
with state and local moneys to fund planning and engineering. This 
federal assistance has been important to us and we are putting the 
money to good use. 

The capital cost estimate for this project is $48 million. However, today 
we are seeking $7 million in FY 93-94 Section 3 funds to finish design 
and to undertake procurement of the five vehicles needed to initiate 
service. This fvmding will be utilized by the end of the calendar year. 

This may be a smaller amount of money than this committee is 
normally asked to address. However, for Orlando, your assistance is 
critical to keeping the project on schedule for a planned January, 1997 
start-up of service. We realize this committee has an interest in holding 
down the percentage of federal participation in Section 3 projects. This 
enables you to extend scarce discretionary funding to as many needy 
projects as possible and also encourages local effort. 

However, I also know that you have a vital interest in managing the 
Section 3 program as an investment fund by placing the money where it 
will generate the highest yields. In this respect, the OSCAR project will 
compare more than favorably with its competition. 



2821 



A Cost-Effective Investment 



The scale of this project is decidedly modest. Less than 2 miles in 
round-trip length and less than $50 million in total capital cost, it is a 
carefully-planned addition to our transit system that is targeted to a 
specific and proven transit market. 

Because of its modest scale and concentrated service market, OSCAR 
will perform more efficiently than most new transit services. Our 
forecasts, developed through the FTA "alternatives analysis" process, 
indicate that OSCAR will move people in downtown Orlando in the 
year 2010 for an op>erating cost of about 98c per rider, less than one third 
of the forecast average cost per rider on our regional system in that year. 

We are also pleased to note that the leading alternatives under 
consideration meet the cost effectiveness index developed by the Federal 
Transit Administration for evaluation of this kind of project. The FTA 
"Cost per New Rider Index" for the leading alternatives range from 
$3.55 to $5.62, compared to the $6 criterion used by FTA staff. 

I would also like to note that the OSCAR project alternatives under 
study do not include any sleek monorails, elevated people-movers, or 
huge commuter trains. We have no interest in a glitzy high-tech ego 
statement designed to "put Orlando on the map." 

Instead, our proposed technology is nothing more grandiose than 
ordinary street trolleys drawing efficient electric power from an 
overhead wire and operating in existing downtown public space. Also, 
let me assure you that, when the time comes, the Qty Council and I will 
make the final selection of a preferred alternative based on 
performance, not glitz. 



2822 




Httdiaim 



2823 

PITTSBURGH, PA 

PORT AUTHORITY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY 

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM W. MILLAR, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

MY NAME IS WILLIAM W. MILLAR, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PORT 
AUTHORITY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY - THE PRINCIPAL PUBLIC 
TRANSPORTATION AGENCY SERVING THE PITTSBURGH URBANIZED 
AREA. PORT AUTHORITY - WHICH LOCAL RESIDENTS KNOW SIMPLY AS 
"PAT" - SERVES APPROXIMATELY 285,000 CUSTOMERS EACH DAY 
THROUGH A VARIETY OF TRANSIT SERVICES INCLUDING BUS, LIGHT 
RAIL, INCLINE AND THE "ACCESS" PARATRANSIT PROGRAM FOR 
ELDERLY AND DISABLED PERSONS. 

I AM PLEASED TO PROVIDE THIS TESTIMONY REGARDING THE 
IMPORTANCE OF FY 1994 TRANSPORTATION APPROPRIATIONS IN 
GENERAL AND REGARDING PATS HIGHEST PRIORITY CAPITAL PROJECT, 
THE BUSWAY SYSTEM EXPANSION PROGRAM. THE BUSWAY EXPANSION 
PROGRAM INCLUDES THE PHASE I AIRPORT BUSWAY / WABASH HOV AND 
THE PHASE I EXTENSION OF THE MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. EAST 
BUSWAY. THESE EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TRANSIT PROJECTS WILL 

SERVE Almost 110,000 persons per day linking people with jobs 

AROUND THE NEW PITTSBURGH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT OPENED IN 
OCTOBER OF 1992. ALLEGHENY COUNTY TAKES GREAT PRIDE IN ITS 
STANDING AS THE WORLD'S BUSWAY PIONEER. THE TIME IS RIGHT TO 
COMPLEMENT OUR SUCCESSFUL BUSWAY NETWORK WITH THE BUSWAY 
SYSTEM EXPANSION PROGRAM. THE FISCAL YEAR 1994 
TRANSPORTATION APPROPRIATIONS BILL WILL BE A KEY TO MAKING 
THIS EXCITING PROJECT HAPPEN. 

RENEWED NATIONAL FOCUS ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE ECONOMY 

IT IS EXTREMELY HEARTENING TO COME TO WASHINGTON THESE 
DAYS AND HEAR BOTH CONGRESS AND THE ADMINISTRATION SPEAK OF 
THE LINK BETWEEN TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS 
AND THE LONG TERM HEALTH OF OUR NATIONAL ECONOMY. PRESIDENT 



2824 



CUNTON'S ECONOMIC AND BUDGET PROPOSALS WOULD PROVIDE BOTH 
LONG TERM INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS, AND A PLAN TO REDUCE 
THE FEDERAL DEFICIT. WHILE ALL OF CONGRESS WILL BE INVOLVED IN 
CONSIDERING THE ADMINISTRATION'S PROPOSALS, IN THE END IT WILL 
BE UP TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEES TO IMPLEMENT ALL 
POLICIES AND PRIORITIES. 

AS CONGRESS CONSIDERED THE ADMINISTRATION'S PROPOSED 
ECONOMIC STIMULUS LEGISLATION, PORT AUTHORITY WAS HOPEFUL TO 
RECEIVE FUNDING FOR SEVERAL KEY PROJECTS WHICH ARE READY TO 
GO AND COULD BEGIN IMMEDIATELY. CONTRACTS EXCEEDING $67 
MILLION AND GENERATING OVER 3,600 JOBS COULD HAVE BEEN 
AWARDED BY SEPTEMBER. I COMMEND THE SUBCOMMITTEE FOR ITS 
POSITIVE ACTIONS REGARDING THE TRANSPORTATION COMPONENTS OF 
THE STIMULUS PACKAGE, AND URGE ALL OF CONGRESS TO NOW 
SUPPORT TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENTS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE FY 
1994 TRANSPORTATION APPROPRIATIONS BILL. THIS LEGISLATION WILL 
SERVE THE DUAL PURPOSE OF MEETING TRANSIT'S NEEDS AND PUTTING 
PEOPLE BACK TO WORK. 

PEOPLE IN ALLEGHENY COUNTY RELY HEAVILY ON PUBLIC 
TRANSPORTATION TO TRAVEL TO AND FROM THEIR JOBS. TO SHOP, TO 
WORSHIP, TO GO TO SCHOOL OR TO PURSUE OTHER SOCIAL AND 
PROFESSIONAL NEEDS. A FEDERAL COMMITMENT TO TRANSIT USE IS 
ESSENTIAL TO ENSURING THIS MOBILITY FOR ALL AMERICANS, AND FOR 
REDUCING AIR POLLUTION, ENERGY USE AND CONGESTION. 

IT IS CRITICAL THAT CONGRESS APPROPRIATE - AT A MINIMUM - THE 
FULL $4.6 BILLION PROPOSED FOR PUBUC TRANSPORTATION BY THE 
CUNTON ADMINISTRATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994 . THIS IS A HRST STEP 
TOWARD FULL FUNDING OF ISTEA. 

WITHIN THE TRANSIT PROGRAM ITSELF, PORT AUTHORITY URGES 
EQUITABLE APPROPRIATIONS TO ALL COMPONENTS OF THE PROGRAM. 
SECTION 9 FORMULA FUNDING NEEDS TO BE INCREASED IN ORDER TO 



2825 



BOLSTER THE FUNDAMENTAL OPERATING AND CAPITAL ACTIVITIES 
FUNDED THROUGH SECTION 9. 

I ALSO STRONGLY URGE THAT FEDERAL OPERATING ASSISTANCE BE 
FUNDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY ISTEA. 
DOESNT IT MAKE SENSE TO SPEND A FEW CENTS MORE EACH YEAR TO 
SEE THAT THE CAPITAL DOLLARS WE HAVE INVESTED ARE MAINTAINED 
AND UTILIZED? AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF A LARGE TRANSIT SYSTEM I 
WANT TO ASSURE MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE THAT OPERATING 
ASSISTANCE IS CRITICAL TO MY AGENCY AND TO THE SERVICES 
PROVIDED TO OUR 285,000 DAILY RIDERS. OPERATING ASSISTANCE IS 
NOT A BIG SYSTEM VS. SMALL SYSTEM ISSUE. 

WE ARE PLEASED THAT THE BUDGET RECONCILIATION PACKAGE 
UNDER CONSIDERATION IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WOULD 
USE THE PORTION OF THE FEDERAL GASOLINE TAX NOT CURRENTLY 
USED FOR TRANSPORTATION (I.E. 2.5<J), FOR TRANSPORTATION 
PROGRAMS, WITH ONE-HALF CENT TO BE USED FOR TRANSIT. THIS IS 
CONSISTENT WITH THE TRADITIONAL 4/5 HIGHWAY 1/5 TRANSIT RATIO. 

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IN ALLEGHENY COUNTY 

WITHOUT QUESTION, PITTSBURGH AND ALLEGHENY COUNTY ARE 
THE FOCAL POINTS OF WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA. WE ARE ALWAYS 
QUICK TO REMIND EVERYONE OF OUR RECOGNITION AS AMERICA'S 
MOST LIVABLE COMMUNITY. PITTSBURGH AND ALLEGHENY COUNTY 
ARE A CORPORATE CENTER, A CULTURAL CENTER, A MEDICAL CENTER, 
AN EDUCATION CENTER, A SPORTS CENTER. AND A CENTER OF DIVERSE 
NEIGHBORHOODS. 

MOREOVER PITTSBURGH AND ALLEGHENY COUNTY TAKE GREAT 
PRIDE IN THEIR COLLECTIVE STANDING AS A TRANSPORTATION CENTER. 

PAT OPERATES 900 BUSES, 71 LIGHT RAIL VEHICLES AND TROLLEYS, 
AND OWNS TWO INCLINED PLANES. PAT CONTRACTS THROUGH AN 



2826 



INDEPENDENT BROKER THE SERVICES OF 13 PRIVATE CARRIERS FOR THE 
"ACCESS" PROGRAM, THE WORLD'S LARGEST COORDINATED 
PARATRANSIT SYSTEM, CARRYING OVER 2.2 MILLION RIDERS PER YEAR. 
IN THE 1980S PAT OPENED A NEW DOWNTOWN SUBWAY, PART OF PAT'S 
HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL STAGE I LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT. 

THE SUCCESS OF THIS PROGRAM HAD LED TO THE DESIRE TO 
EXTEND THE SYSTEM TO THE NORTHSIDE AND THE OAKLAND SECTION 
OF THE CITY OF PITTSBURGH. IN ADDITION THERE REMAINS 12 MILES OF 
LINE WHICH MUST BE REHABILITATED. WHEN THESE PROJECTS ARE 
COMPLETED LIGHT RAIL RIDERSHIP SHOULD APPROACH 110,000 PER DAY. 

BUT IT HAS BEEN OUR PIONEERING OF THE CONCEPT OF BUSWAYS 
WHERE PERHAPS WE HAVE BEEN MOST INNOVATIVE. WITH THE HELP OF 
THIS SUBCOMMITTEE PAT OPENED THE WORLD'S FIRST TRULY 
EXCLUSIVE BUSWAY - THE SOUTH BUSWAY - IN 1977. THIS 4.0 MILE 
ROADWAY ALLOWS PAT BUSES SERVING 16,000 DAILY RIDERS TO BYPASS 
HEAVILY CONGESTED ROADS AND TUNNELS IN THE SOUTH HILLS 
COMMUNITIES OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY. 

IN 1983 WE EXTENDED THIS CONCEPT TO EASTERN 
NEIGHBORHOODS OF PITTSBURGH AND ALLEGHENY COUNTY WHEN WE 
OPENED THE MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. EAST BUSWAY. THIS 6.8 MILE 
ROADWAY RUNS FROM DOWNTOWN PITTSBURGH TO SUBURBAN 
WILKINSBURG, EACH DAY TRANSPORTING APPROXIMATELY 30,000 
RIDERS QUICKLY AND EFFICIENTLY TO THEIR DESTINATIONS. 

THE EAST BUSWAY ALONG WITH OUR REHABILITATED LIGHT RAIL 
LINE SERVING THE SOUTH HILLS ARE BOTH GENERATING 
CONSIDERABLE PRIVATE INVESTMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. 

PAT AND THE CITY OF PITTSBURGH HAVE ALSO SUCCESSFULLY 
IMPLEMENTED A SERIES OF EXCLUSIVE BUS LANES WITHIN THE CITY 
STREET NETWORK. THE PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF 
TRANSPORTATION HAS ALSO DEDICATED FOR HIGH-OCCUPANCY 



2827 



VEHICLE USE A TWO-LANE SEGMENT OF THE RECENTLY OPENED 
"PARKWAY NORTH" (1-279). 

IN SUMMARY, ALLEGHENY COUNTY HAS DEVELOPED AND HAS 
INVESTED IN A VERY DIVERSE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. 
WHILE WE ARE PLEASED WITH OUR RAIL SYSTEM AND HOV FACILITIES, 
WE FIND BUSWAYS TO BE PARTICULARLY PROMISING IN SEVERAL KEY 
CORRIDORS. 

CAPITAL AND OPERATING EFFICIENCIES OF BUSWAY TECHNOLOGY 

WITH THE 1977 OPENING OF THE SOUTH BUSWAY PAT SHOWED THE 
WORLD A NEW TRANSPORTATION INNOVATION. THE ADVANTAGES OF 
BUSWAYS HAVE INDEED PROVEN TO BE QUITE FORMIDABLE. 

BUSWAYS SERVE AS AN EXTENSION OF THE URBAN STREET AND 
ROADWAY SYSTEM. BUSWAYS ALLOW THE FLEXIBILITY FOR BUSES TO 
PICK UP PASSENGERS ANYWHERE ON THE STREET NETWORK, THEN 
FEED INTO THE BUSWAY TRUNKLINE FOR AN EXPRESS TRIP TO 
DOWNTOWN OR OTHER DESTINATIONS. THESE BUSES - ALWAYS FULLY 
LOADED DURING PEAK HOURS IN THESE DENSE URBAN CORRIDORS - 
BYPASS THE AUTOMOBILE-CAUSED CONGESTION OF THE PARALLEL 
ROADWAYS. 

BUSWAYS CAN ALSO OPERATE VERY MUCH LIKE RAPID RAIL, IN THE 
SENSE THAT THEY OPERATE ON A FIXED-FACILITY AND HAVE STATION 
STOPS ALONG THE ROUTE. RIDERSHIP AT THE STATIONS ALONG THE 
MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. EAST BUSWAY IS SUCH THAT PAT OPERATES 
EXTRA-CAPACITY ARTICULATED BUSES, THUS ALLOWING 
CONSIDERABLE PRODUCTTVITY SAVINGS. 

BUSWAYS DEPEND MUCH LESS ON PARK-AND-RIDE TRAVELERS 
THAN DO URBAN RAIL SYSTEMS, HAVING THE FLEXIBILITY OF 
COLLECTING PASSENGERS FROM NEIGHBORHOOD ROUTES AND THEN 



2828 



MOVING INTO THE BUSWA Y TRUNKLINE VIA NUMEROUS ACCESS POINTS. 
BUSWAYS ARE ALSO LESS VULNERABLE TO BREAKDOWNS THAN ARE 
URBAN RAIL SYSTEMS, THUS ALLOWING FOR CONTINUOUS FREE FLOW 
OF TRAFFIC. THIS HELPS MINIMIZE SERVICE DISRUPTIONS CAUSED BY 
EQUIPMENT FAILURE. 

IN PROVIDING RIDERS WITH SIGNIFICANT TIME SAVINGS, BUSWAYS 
ALSO ALLOW CONSIDERABLE SAVINGS IN OPERATING COSTS BY 
REDUCING THE OPERATOR-HOURS INVOLVED IN EACH TRIP. 
SIGNIFICANT PRODUCTIVITY BENEFITS ALSO ACCRUE FROM THE 
LOCATION OF A MAJOR BUS GARAGE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE 
BUSWAY. "DEADHEAD" TRIPS TO AND FROM THE GARAGE ARE 
HASTENED BY THE BUSWAY AND THE LOCATION OF THE BUS GARAGE. 

FINALLY. BUSWAYS OFFER A CONSIDERABLE SAVINGS IN CAPITAL 
COSTS OVER MOST OTHER TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS. BUSWAYS DO 
NOT REQUIRE THE SOPHISTICATED SIGNAL SYSTEM AND TRACKWORK OF 
URBAN RAIL, AND CAN OPERATE WITH STANDARD, RELATIVELY 
INEXPENSIVE BUSES. 

CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES IN A POST-INDUSTRLAL ECONOMY 

THE 1980'S WAS A PERIOD OF ECONOMIC TRANSFORMATION IN 
SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA. THE COLLAPSE OF THE STEEL 
INDUSTRY BROUGHT GREAT PAIN TO MANY PEOPLE. AND DISTRESS TO 
MANY COMMUNITIES. JOBS WERE LOST, PEOPLE RELOCATED TO OTHER 
REGIONS. AND THE COMMUNITY WAS LEFT SEARCHING FOR A NEW 
ECONOMIC BASE. 

SINCE THEN THE REGION HAS REBOUNDED, AND IS POISED FOR 
FUTURE GROWTH. THE DOWNTOWN AND THE OAKLAND SECTIONS OF 
THE CITY ARE PROJECTED FOR CONTINUED GROWTH. THE BIGGEST JOB 
GROWTH AREA WILL BE WESTERN ALLEGHENY COUNTY, WHERE THE 
NEW PITTSBURGH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT HAS SPARKED SIGNIFICANT 
PRIVATE INVESTMENT IN THIS WESTERN CORRIDOR. U.S. AIR HAS MADE 



2829 



A LONG-TERM COMMITMENT TO PITTSBURGH AS A HUB CITY. THE 
ADVANTAGES OF A LOCATION NEAR THE NEW AIRPORT, COUPLED WITH 
THE AVAILABILITY OF LAND IN A DESIRABLE AREA HAVE MADE THE 
AIRPORT CORRIDOR RIPE FOR CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT. 

HOWEVER, THE WAY TO NEW ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES IS LADEN 
WITH CHALLENGES. THE CORRIDOR CURRENTLY IS SERVED WITH AN 
INADEQUATE ROADWAY NETWORK. IN ITS MAIN THOROUGHFARE - THE 
PARKWAY WEST (1-279) - COMMUTERS ENDURE DAILY TRAFFIC DELAYS 
OF UP TO 45 MINUTES IN TRIPS FROM THE AIRPORT TO DOWNTOWN 
PITTSBURGH. 

THE NEED TO IMPROVE THE LINK BETWEEN PITTSBURGH AND THE 
AIRPORT, AND TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO JOBS FOR PEOPLE LIVING IN THE 
ESTABLISHED COMMUNITIES OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY HAS LED THE 
SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION 
AND OTHER REGIONAL BODIES TO RECOMMEND A BUSWAY SYSTEM 
EXPANSION PROGRAM FOR ALLEGHENY COUNTY. THIS PROGRAM 
INCLUDES THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PHASE I AIRPORT BUSWAY AND 
PHASE I EXTENSION OF THE MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. EAST BUSWAY. 

THE BUSWAY SYSTEM EXPANSION PROGRAM IS A REGIONAL PRIORITY 

THE SUBCOMMITTEE'S SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT IN FY 1992 AND IN 
FY 1993 REFLECTED THE MERITS OF THE PROJECT AND ITS IMPORTANCE 
TO OUR REGION. THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION HAS VIEWED 
THE PROJECT WITH GREAT FAVOR. PROMINENT GROUPS SUCH AS THE 
ALLEGHENY CONFERENCE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND 
ALLEGHENY COUNTY'S STRATEGY 21 HAVE IDENTIFIED THE PROJECT AS 
A TOP PRIORITY FOR OUR REGION. 

AS I NOTED IN LAST YEAR'S TESTIMONY, THE BUSWAY PROPOSED BY 
THE SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA REGIONAL PLANNING 
COMMISSION WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED IN PHASES. THE PHASE I 
SEGMENT WOULD INCLUDE A BRIDGE FROM DOWNTOWN PITTSBURGH 



2830 



ACROSS THE MONONGAHELA RIVER, WHERE THE BUSWAY WOULD 
CONTINUE ALONGSIDE AN ACTIVE RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY OWNED BY 
CONRAIL, BRANCH ONTO AN ABANDONED RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY 
AND EVENTUALLY CONNECT WITH THE PARKWAY WEST IN CARNEGIE 
BOROUGH. EIGHT PASSENGER STATIONS AND EIGHT PARK AND RIDE 
SITES WOULD BE BUILT AS PART OF THE PHASE I AIRPORT BUSWAY. 
ABOUT 30 MINUTES PROJECTED TIME SAVINGS WOULD ACCRUE TO MANY 
COMMUTERS USING THE BUSWAY. 

THIS INTERMODAL PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES A HIGH-OCCUPANCY 
VEHICLE (HOV) FACILITY FROM ROUTE 51 TO DOWNTOWN PITTSBURGH 
USING THE EXISTING WABASH TUNNEL. THIS HOV TUNNEL WOULD 
SHARE A COMMON BRIDGE INTO DOWNTOWN PITTSBURGH WITH THE 
AIRPORT BUSWAY. THE WABASH TUNNEL IS OWNED BY PAT AND IS A 
COMMUNITY RESOURCE WHICH COULD BE INTEGRATED INTO AND BUILT 
AS PART OF AN 8.7 MILE AIRPORT BUSWAY. 

WITH THE PHASE I AIRPORT BUSWAY 22,000 DAILY BUS PASSENGERS 
CURRENTLY TRAVELING THROUGH THE CORRIDOR IN PUBLIC OR 
PRIVATE BUSES WOULD GAIN THE IMMEDIATE BENEFITS OF 
CONGESTION -FREE SERVICE. IT IS ESTIMATED THAT RIDERSHIP WOULD 
DOUBLE TO MORE THAN 59,000 RIDERS PER DAY BY 2005. STUDIES HAVE 
SHOWN AN EXTREMELY FAVORABLE COST-EFFECTIVENESS RATING OF 
LESS THAN $5.00 PER NEW RIDER. OF COURSE, EACH NEW RIDER MEANS 
LESS CONGESTION AND FEWER POLLUTION-EMITTING AUTOMOBILES ON 
THE ROAD. 

DURING 1992 PORT AUTHORITY COMPLETED THE REQUIRED 
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS, AND HAS PROCEEDED INTO THE 
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PHASE. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE 
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS BROUGHT FORTH OVER 130 COMMENTS, ONLY 
TWO OF WHICH DID NOT COMMENT FAVORABLY. THIS REFLECTS THE 
WIDESPREAD COMMUNITY SUPPORT WHICH EXISTS AND ALSO THE 
MINIMAL PROPERTY RELOCATION AND COMMUNITY DISRUPTION WHICH 
THIS PROJECT WILL BRING. 



2831 



SURVIVING RECONSTRUCTION OF THE FORT PITT BRIDGE 

Prn-SBURGH IS A CITY OF MANY BRIDGES. FAR AND AWAY THE 
BUSIEST OF THESE BRIDGES IS THE FORT PITT BRIDGE. CARRYING OVER 
140,000 VEHICLES EACH DAY. THE FORT PITT BRIDGE AND TUNNEL IS 
THE PORTHOLE INTO PITTSBURGH FROM THE AIRPORT CORRIDOR. 

THE FORT PITT BRIDGE MUST UNDERGO RECONSTRUCTION WITHIN 
THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS. UNLESS ALTERNATE TRANSPORTATION 
MEANS ARE IMPLEMENTED, ITS CLOSING WILL CAUSE GREAT ECONOMIC 
DISRUPTION IN THE CITY AND IN THE AIRPORT CORRIDOR. 

AS NOTED EARLIER, THIS CORRIDOR ALREADY SUFFERS FROM AN 
ACUTE UNDERCAPACITY IN ITS TRANSPORTATION NETWORK, AND THE 
CLOSING OF THE FT. PITT BRIDGE COULD MAKE THIS SITUATION MANY 
TIMES WORSE. 

THE PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HAS 
IDENTIFIED THE AIRPORT BUSWAY AS A TRANSPORTATION STRATEGY 
WHICH COULD MITIGATE THE SEVERE IMPACT OF THE BRIDGE CLOSING, 
AND HAS INDICATED THAT IT IS WILUNG TO DELAY RECONSTRUCTION 
OF THE BRIDGE IF THE AIRPORT BUSWAY AND ITS WABASH TUNNEL LINK 
CAN BE CONSTRUCTED IN AN EXPEDITIOUS TIMEFRAME. 

THE IMPENDING CLOSING OF THE FORT PITT BRIDGE HAS THUS 
ADDED FURTHER TO THE IMPORTANCE OF THE BUSWAY SYSTEM 
EXPANSION PROGRAM, AND HAS MADE THE PROJECT EVEN MORE 
CRITICAL AND TIMELY TO THE REGION. 

BUILDING ON SUCCESS: THE PHASE I EXTENSION OF THE MARTIN 
LUTHER KING. JR. EAST BUSWAY 

AS NOTED EARLIER, THE MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. EAST BUSWAY 
IS A PAT SUCCESS STORY. THE EAST BUSWAY SERVES A DENSE, URBAN 
CORRIDOR WHICH HAS THE HIGHEST TRANSIT RIDERSHIP IN ALLEGHENY 



2832 



COUNTY. SINCE ITS OPENING IN 1983 RIDERS HAVE BENEFITTED FROM 
MUCH GREATER SERVICE RELIABILITY AS WELL AS TIME SAVINGS OF 
MORE THAN 50 PERCENT FOR MANY TRIPS. OUR MARKET RESEARCH HAS 
SHOWN SUCH TIME SAVINGS TO BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE MEANS FOR 
ATTRACTING RIDERS OUT OF THEIR AUTOMOBILES AND ONTO TRANSIT. 
OVER 10,000 DAILY AUTO USERS ARE DIVERTED TO THIS FACILITY 
ALONE. DESPITE A 13 PERCENT POPULATION LOSS IN THE ADJACENT 
CORRIDOR AREA SINCE 1980, RIDERSHIP ON THE EAST BUSWAY HAS 
GROWN ABOUT 50% DURING ITS TEN YEARS OF OPERATION. 

SERVICE ON THE EAST BUSWAY CONSISTS OF BUSES STOPPING AT 
SIX STATIONS SERVING PREDOMINANTLY WALK-ON PASSENGERS, PLUS 
SERVICE PROVIDED ON ROUTES WHICH TRAVERSE LOCAL 
NEIGHBORHOODS AND THEN ENTER THE BUSWAY AT SEVEN LOCATIONS 
TO COMPLETE THEIR TRIPS ON A TRAFFIC-FREE, NONSTOP BASIS. 

THE SUCCESS OF THE EAST BUSWAY HAS SPURRED REQUESTS FROM 
NEIGHBORHOODS AND MUNICIPALITIES TO EXTEND THE BUSWAY 
EASTWARD TO PROVIDE EXPRESS BUS SERVICE TO MORE OF THE 
MONONGAHELA VALLEY, THE CENTER OF THE ONCE THRIVING STEEL 
INDUSTRY. TODAY, THE BUSWAY EXTENSION CAN BE PART OF THE 
EFFORT TO REDEVELOP THE MON VALLEY AND PROVIDE ACCESS TO 
JOBS FOR THOUSANDS OF ITS UNEMPLOYED AND UNDEREMPLOYED 
RESIDENTS. 

PHASE I IS A 2.3 MILE EXTENSION OF THE EAST BUSWAY TO SERVE 
THE ADJACENT COMMUNITIES OF EDGEWOOD, SWISSVALE AND RANKIN. 
AND TO ALLOW COMMUNITIES THROUGHOUT THE MONONGAHELA AND 
TURTLE CREEK VALLEYS IMPROVED ACCESS TO THE BUSWAY. SERVICE 
WOULD CONTINUE TO INCLUDE ROUTES STOPPING AT ALL STATIONS 
PLUS EXPRESS ROUTES. PROJECTED AVERAGE TIME SAVINGS WOULD BE 
10 MINUTES PER TRIP. 



2833 



IN ADDITION. THE EXTENDED BUSWAY WILL INCLUDE PARK-N-RIDE 
LOTS, A FEATURE WHICH DOES NOT EXIST ON THE CURRENT EAST 
BUSWAY. 

DAILY RIDERSHIP IS PROJECTED TO INCREASE FROM 30,400 TODAY 
TO OVER 50,000 BY THE YEAR 2005. THE FEDERAL COST-EFFECTIVENESS 
CALCULATION FOR THIS EXTENSION IS ABOUT $5.00 TOTAL-COST-PER- 
NEW-RIDER, AGAIN SHOWING ITS COST EFFECTIVENESS. 

THE BUSWAY SYSTEM EXPANSION PROGRAM IS READY TO GO 

THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION HAS THUS RANKED BOTH 
THE AIRPORT BUSWAY / WABASH HOV AND THE MARTIN LUTHER KING, 
JR. EAST BUSWAY EXTENSION AMONG THE TOP FOUR PROJECTS IN THE 
COUNTRY IN TERMS OF COST EFFECTIVENESS. THE FEDERAL TRANSIT 
ADMINISTRATION IS VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROJECT. AND HAS 
INDICATED IN ITS REPORT TO CONGRESS ON FUNDING LEVELS AND 
ALLOCATIONS OF FUNDS (THE SO-CALLED 3(J) REPORT) THAT FTA 
PROVIDE A LETTER OF INTENT FOR THE FULL FUNDING OF THE PROJECT. 

FURTHER, THE AIRPORT BUSWAY WILL BE IN ITS PEAK CONTRACT 
YEAR IN 1994. PORT AUTHORITY EXPECTS TO COMPLETE THE $7 MILLION 
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PHASE OF THE PROJECT BY FALL 1993 AND 
TO IMMEDIATELY PROCEED INTO FINAL DESIGN AND RIGHT-OF-WAY 
ACQUISITION. THE PROCESS OF AWARDING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS 
EXCEEDING $150 MILLION WILL BEGIN IN THE SUMMER OF 1994. 

ACCELERATING THE BUSWAY SYSTEM EXPANSION PROGRAM 

THE BUSWAY SYSTEM EXPANSION PROGRAM HAS BECOME A 
NATIONAL MODEL FOR INTERMODAL PLANNING, COOPERATION AND 
FINANCING. AS NOTED, THE AIRPORT BUSWAY / WABASH HOV PROJECT 
INTEGRATES AN EXCLUSIVE BUSWAY AND A TUNNEL TO BE USED BY 
HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLES. PAT, THE PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT 
OF TRANSPORTATION. THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION, THE 



2834 



FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND THE SOUTHWESTERN 
REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION HAVE HAD EXTENSIVE. 
COOPERATIVE MEETINGS TO DEVELOP A FEASIBLE PROJECT SCHEDULE 
AND FUNDING PLAN. THE FUNDING PLAN COMBINES TRADITIONAL 
SOURCES OF TRANSIT CAPITAL FUNDING WITH NEW, CREATIVE 
FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS, SUCH AS INTERMODAL FUNDING 
SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED FOR THIS PROJECT IN TITLE I OF ISTEA. 
REFLECTING ITS STRONG REGIONAL SUPPORT, THE PROJECT IS ALSO 
RECEIVING EXTENSIVE AMOUNTS OF "FLEXIBLE" FUNDING AVAILABLE 
TO THE METROPOLITAN AREA. FUNDING ALSO INCLUDES OVER $90 
MILLION PLEDGED BY THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. 

PORT AUTHORITY IS EXTREMELY APPRECIATIVE OF THE SUPPORT 
FOR THE BUSWAY SYSTEM EXPANSION PROGRAM PROVIDED BY ITS 
CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION AND BY THIS SUBCOMMITTEE IN FISCAL 
YEAR 1992 AND IN FISCAL YEAR 1993. ALL FUNDING ALLOCATED TO THE 
PROJECT THROUGH THOSE APPROPRIATIONS BILLS IS UNDER CONTRACT 
WITH THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION . IN THE FISCAL YEAR 

1993 TRANSPORTATION APPROPRIATIONS BILL IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT 
WE RECEIVE A CONGRESSIONAL EARMARK OF $56.5 MILLION . THESE 
FUNDS COULD EITHER COME FROM FTA "NEW START" FUNDS. OR FROM 
FUNDS AUTHORIZED IN SECTION 1069 OF ISTEA TO BE APPROPRIATED TO 
THIS PROJECT, OR THROUGH A COMBINATION OF BOTH. A $56.5 MILLION 
EARMARK IS CRITICAL FOR THE PROJECT TO COMPLETE RIGHT-OF-WAY 
ACQUISITION AND TO PROCEED INTO CONSTRUCTION IN 1994. WITH THE 
COOPERATION OF THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION SPECIAL 
PROJECT MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS HAVE BEEN PUT IN PLACE 
WHICH WILL EXPEDITE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROJECT AND 
WHICH WILL REQUIRE THAT ALL FUNDING BE IN PLACE. 

SUMMARY 

BUSWAYS HAVE PROVEN TO BE EFFECTIVE FIXED GUIDEWAY 
IN VESTMENl-S. ALLEGHENY COUNTY'S PROPOSED ELEVEN MILE PHASE I 



2835 



EXPANSION PROGRAM WILL PROVIDE IMMEDIATE BENEFITS FOR THE 
CITIZENS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, THE COMMONWEALTH OF 
PENNSYLVANIA AND THE NATION. 

THE BUSWAY SYSTEM EXPANSION PROGRAM - A PROJECT WHICH 
RANKS EXTREMELY HIGH ON THE BASIS OF COST EFFECTIVENESS - IS 
EVEN MORE CRITICAL TO THE REGION WHEN COUPLED WITH THE NEED 
TO SERVE THE EMERGING AIRPORT CORRIDOR AND PROVIDE ACCESS TO 
ITS JOB SITES. FURTHER, ITS POSTURE AS A PRINCIPAL TRAFFIC 
MITIGATION STRATEGY DURING THE IMPENDING RECONSTRUCTION OF 
THE FORT PITT BRIDGE ADDS STILL FURTHER TO ITS PRIORITY STATUS. 
THE SUBCOMMITTEE'S APPROVAL OF $56.5 MILLION TO THE PROJECT 
WILL MAKE THESE BENEFITS POSSIBLE. 



2836 



SEMINOLE, OSCEOLA, AND ORANGE COUNTIES, FL 
STATEMENT OF PAUL SKOUTELAS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, LYNX 

Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on behalf of a critical transportation 
project in Central Florida. I am Paul Skoutelas, Executive Director of Lynx, the regional 
transportation agency in Seminole, Osceola, and Orange Counties, Florida. We are requesting 
$25.4 million from the Federal Transit Administration (FT A) in Fiscal Year 1994. This request 
would be funded out of the "bus and bus facilities" account. 

For the first time, a number of transportation and governmental agencies in Central 
Florida have come together in an effort to coordinate their federal transportation requests. This 
effort includes the Counties of Orange, Seminole, and Osceola, the City of Orlando, the Orlando 
International Airport Authority, Lynx, and the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority. 
The State Department of Transportation also supports this request. 

We are requesting a total of $25.4 million for Lynx. This would fund the following 
items: 

New operating and repair facility $ 10 million 
Purchase 80 new buses 14 million 

Purchase 24 commuter vans .4 million 

Communications/computerized scheduling/ 
automatic vehicle location system 1 million , 



Total $25.4 million 



Lynx has been working closely with FTA regarding these needs. In fact, the above items 
are parts of a larger request Lynx prepared and submitted to FTA at the direction of the agency 
in March. According to estimates made at the time, 2,147 jobs would result from the 
expenditures for the balance of 1993 and beyond. 

This request is important for another reason. Orlando has been chosen as one of the 
locations to host some of the 1994 World Cup Soccer games. Orlando is the only city chosen 
without a mature, comprehensive mass transportation system in place. Recent estimates are that 
the city will need over 600 buses to handle the visitors arriving for the games. 

Lynx is a rapidly growing system designed to meet the needs of a dynamic, growing 
metropolitan area. The $25.4 million is critically needed to help meet the transportation needs 
of the Central Florida area. 



Thank you for your consideration of this request. 



2837 



SPACEPORT FLORIDA AUTHORITY 

STATEMENT OF EDWARD A. 0'CX)NNOR, JR., EXECUTIVE 

DIRECTOR 

MR. CHAIRMAM AND MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE: 

Thank you for providing me with this opportunity to communicate to 
you the views of the State of Florida on space transportation and 
our nation's eroding competitive position in this strategic 
international segment of transportation. I bring to you both good 
news and bad news regarding the current status of the nation's 
space transportation system as well as the infrastructure and 
industry that support it. 

The bad news is that during the past year, the competitive position 
of the United States' space transportation industry has continued 
to erode. Fifteen years ago the United States led the world in 
providing virtually all of the space transportation for the world's 
communications satellites. 

In 1992, however, the nation's most formidable competitor in space 
transportation — Europe's Arianespace consortium — has claimed 
57.4 per cent of the world space transportation market and China 
has claimed an additional 4 per cent. The United States currently 
claims less than 40 per cent of the world space transportation 
market. 

Also in 1992 a new and even more formidable competitor — Russia — 
entered the international marketplace with its first contract to 
launch a U.S. satellite. Further, on the horizon of the 
international marketplace is future and additional competition from 
the nations of Japan, India, and Brazil. 

As you may know, the cost of a single medium-class commercial 
launch is in the range of $45 to $70 million. That means the loss 



2838 



of a single commercial launch to an international competitor is a 
loss of $45 to $70 million to the nation's gross national product. 
It is also a loss of about 400 U.S. high tech jobs and a further 
imbalance of international trade in a segment of the nation's 
economy that has long been a leader in exports. 

There are two pieces of good news. First, the international market 
for space transportation is expected to expand dramatically between 
the years 1994 and 2000. During that time, the U.S. satellite 
industry is currently projecting the need to launch more than 300 
satellites. (See Attachment 1) . Although a smaller number of 
launches is actually expected to occur, the nation's space 
transportation system must expand beyond its current limits in 
order to meet this demand. The alternative is a continued erosion 
of U.S. market share. 

Second, the State Governments and Industry are now willing to work 
with the Federal Government to turn the tide, to reclaim the 
nation's market share in the international marketplace for space 
transportation. No longer is it necessary for the Federal 
Government to continue its full funding of the infrastructure that 
is necessary to support the nation's space transportation system. 

Instead, State Governments — such as the State of Florida — are 
willing to share that burden by investing in space transportation 
infrastructure. The reason that State Governments are willing to 
make this investment is to keep as well as to create high-paying, 
high tech jobs. 

Because our nation's space transportation system is out of date and 
costly to maintain, the U.S. and its states will lose both revenue 
and jobs to our international competitors. State Governments, 
including the State of Florida, have already begun to invest in the 
nation's space transportation system. 



2839 



During the past three years, Florida has invested more than 
$3 million in programs aimed at improving U.S. competitiveness in 
space transportation. And other states, such as Hawaii, Alaska, 
New Mexico, California, and Virginia are making similar 
investments. But the States cannot continue to do so without the 
Federal Government as a partner. 

Industry has also begun to invest in the nation's space 
transportation system. For example, Honeywell Corporation of 
Minnesota has made a $90 million investment in avionics systems to 
be utilized in the existing and new space transportation system. 
And Thiokol Corporation of Utah has invested more than $40 million 
in its creation of a new rocket motor, the Castor 12 0. Other 
companies such as Orbital Sciences Corporation, EER, and 
International Microspace of Virginia, and the American Rocket 
Company of California have also recently invested millions of 
dollars to improve the U.S. space transportation system. 

The State Governments and Industry are now proposing to make 
additional investments in the nation's space transportation 
infrastructure through a matching grant program in which the 
Federal Government, State Governments, and industry participate. 
Such a grant program was both created within the Department of 
Transportation and authorized in the amount of $10 million under 
the NASA Authorization Act of 1992, Public Law 102-588. An excerpt 
of the relevant part of that law is attached to this testimony. 
(See Attachment 2) . 

It is now time — in the fiscal year 1994 budget of the Department 
of Transportation — to provide an appropriation in the amount of 
$10 million for the space transportation infrastructure grant 
program. Providing this $10 million appropriation is an important 
step toward establishing 21st Century Infrastructure to reclaim the 
nation's space transportation system and its competitiveness. 



2840 



It is an action that will directly benefit the several states in 
which space transportation infrastructure is or will be located — 
including Florida, Alaska, Hawaii, New Mexico, Virginia, 
California, Texas, Alabama, and Mississippi. It is an action that 
will also benefit the states in which no infrastructure is located 
but in which space transportation hardware is built — including 
Michigan, Minnesota, Texas, Colorado, and Utah. 

In order to illustrate the potential benefits of the space 
transportation infrastructure grant program, I will provide to you 
an example of what could be achieved at one site of space 
transportation infrastructure — Cape Canaveral. For a total 
investment of $5 million — only half of which would be provided by 
the Federal Government — a commercial launch complex could be 
developed at an underutilized Launch Complex at Cape Canaveral Air 
Force Station. 

Unlike current launch complexes which serve only one type of launch 
vehicle, this modified Launch Complex would accommodate a variety 
of small-class launch vehicles for a variety of launch service 
companies. Our agency expects that the Launch Complex could be 
configured — with State Government participation — for use by at 
least three U.S. commercial launch companies. This would establish 
a permanent system at Cape Canaveral that does not currently exist, 
to launch small-class satellites that are now under development for 
the new generation of communications satellites that have been and 
are being developed for worldwide application. 

If there is no grant program, the space transportation 
infrastructure at the Launch Complex will not be modified and at 
least three separate companies would be required to individually 
invest in new space transportation infrastructure if available 
locations at Cape Canaveral could be identified. And it is 
important to note that the total cost of those separate efforts 



2841 



would exceed $39 million — compared to a total investment of 

$5 million through the grant program, only half of which is funded 

by the Federal Government. 

As my previous testimony has established, there is an immediate 
need for the space transportation infrastructure grant program. A 
decision by this Committee to appropriate $10 million in fiscal 
year 1994 for that purpose would well serve the nation. 

Once again, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I thank 
you for the opportunity to prolvide to this Committee testimony on 
this vital issue. 



2842 

ST. LOUIS, MO 

METRO LINK RAIL PROJECT 

STATEMENT OF JOHN K. LEARY, JR., EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 
BI-STATE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY 

Mr. Chairman. I would like to outline in detail 
the specifics of oxir Fiscal Yeeu: 1994 funding 
requirements and the status of the Metro Linlc light 
rail project. 

To ijpdate you on Metro Link, as you can see from 
the photographs in your folders, construction is more 
tham 90% complete. I am proud to report that the 
project is on schedule and within budget. As you may 
recall, Mr. Chairman, with a planned opening this July 
1st, last year's conference report granted us approval 
to borrow f\inds needed to meet the July 1993 opening 
date sp>ecified in our Full Fiinding Agreement. To recap 
last year ' s req[uests emd allocations , our f \2nding 
request for FY ' 93 for the first phase of Metro Link was 
$46,460,539 while the actual amount received was $39.3 
million, leaving a shortfall of approximately $7.2 
million for the 1993 requirements. In recognition of 
the funding squeeze, we had deferred those ftinds needed 
for the Berkeley spur, as well as the East Riverfront 
Station amounting to a total of $7,456,722 to coincide 
with the expansion of Lambert-St. Louis International 
Airport sind the Jefferson National Expemsion Memorial 
on the East St. Louis Riverfront. 

The $39.3 million grant in FY '93 has been included 
in an amendment to the Full Fvinding Grant Agreement 
which has ensibled us to accommodate an enheuiced 
security and commvini cations system, realignment and 
design changes required to serve Lambert Airport and 
additional costs of land acquisition for the system. 

For Fiscal Year 1994 , our funding requirement is 
$19,596,345. This includes the shortfall in the FY ' 93 
appropriation of $7.2 million; the sunount deferred last 
year and now needed ($7.5 million); additional 
extraordinary expenses of $4.1 million; and $0.8 
million for loan carrying expenses auid FTA project 
management oversight (PMO) expenses. 

Metro Link, together with Bi-State's integrated bus 
transit system promises the people of the St. Louis 
Metropolitam area significantly improved mobility, new 
opportijnities for economic development and the creation 
of permanent jobs as a resvilt of that development. 

Alternative Fuel Bus Project 

The Agency seeks to provide an environmentally 
clean integrated bus amd light rail system for the St. 



2843 



Louis region which has the status of an EPA ozone non- 
attainment eurea. 

We have am excellent opportunity to address this 
concern with a unique public/private partnership with 
Laclede Gas Con^emy of St. Louis. Since we lack locea 
matching funds , Laclede Gas has agreed to provide over 
$3 million local match for a $16,903,900 federeil 
request to purchase 54 natural gas fueled buses amd 
modify facilities for these buses. Therefore, we are 
requesting an appropriation of $17 million in Section 3 
f\2nds for this importsmt addition to our bus fleet. To 
that end, this public utility amd Bi-State successfully 
cooperated in a test program to determine the 
feasibility of conpressed natural gas (CNG) as a fuel 
for buses to reach conplisunce with cleeui eu.r 
legislative requirements. 

Furthermore, these CNG buses which have been proven 
to enhance air quality are an advsuitageous choice for 
replacement of vehicles in our trsmsit fleet because 
they are wheelchair lift-equipped, and address the 
critical issue of appropriate treuisportation services 
for the disabled. 

Finally, Mr. Chairman, this project has had a 
significamt in5>act in the creation of jobs, revitalized 
old infrastructure and pun^>ed more than $300 million 
into the local economy. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, 
we want to successfully conplete this project on time 
amd within the costs aJ.lowed under our full fxinding 
gramt agreement. Just as in^sortant, is the need to 
upgrade our transit fleet with wheelchair lift- 
equipped, con^^ressed natural gas buses which are 
environmentally cleam amd accessible to all. Bi-State 
needs your support in fulfilling the operating amd 
capiteJ. requirements of our entire multi -modal 
integrated bus-rail system. We hope very much the 
Coimnittee will assist us in achieving this goal. 



2844 

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH DAKOTA 
STATEMENT OF DR. KENDALL BAKER, PRESIDENT 



THE AIRWAY SCIENCE NETWORK 

The University of North Dakota's Center for Aerospace Sciences (UND Aerospace] is 
requesting $2.8 million in Fiscal Year 94 to operate and maintain the Airway Science Network. 
The Network was established through funding from the Federal Aviation Administration. It is a 
satellite-based distance education network designed to reach a nationwide audience of students, 
scholars, and professionals, most of whom are associated with FAA and its designated Airway 
Science Schools. Specific objectives of this network are to: 

• Design, develop, and deliver via satellite live, interactive, instructor-led courses and short 
courses. 

• Design, develop, and deliver via satellite live and pre-recorded programs which provide 
daily aviation-related news and weather. 

• Design, develop and broadcast "magazine" programming (live and/or pre-recorded). 

• Record and broadcast special events (live and/or pre-recorded). 

• Design, develop, and implement instructional applications for aerospace education and 
training which uses state-of-the-art platforms such as computer-based instruction, 
multimedia, part-task trainers, scientific and technical visualizations, intelligent tutoring 
systems, performance support systems, virtual reality, and other emerging technologies. 

• Study the impact of advanced education delivery systems and create guidelines for using 
these systems in the most optimum way. 

• Conduct transfer of training research studies that investigate the impact of computer- 
based instruction on performance in simulated and actual operational environments. 



The network's primary strategic goal is to achieve self-sufficiency through the sale of 
network programming and training services to the aviation industry at-iarge. Educational 
programming to universities and colleges would be provided at no cost to receiving institutions 
of higher education. To facilitate this goal, UND Aerospace intends to work with a long-term 
strategic corporate partner who will make a financial investment in the network. 



BACKGROUND 

The Airway Science Network has been in planning and development since the late 1980's 
as the FAA began exploring the possibility of distance education as a means for the enhancement 
of instruction in aviation nationwide. By the end of FY93, some $15 million will have been 
invested in the Airway Science Network-over $8.5 million from the FAA and over $6.0 million 
in matching funds and in-kind contributions from UND Aerospace. In September 1990, UND 
Aerospace contracted with IBM to design a satellite-based distance education center modeled 
after their highly successful satellite training networks. A year later, UND Aerospace again 



2845 



contracted with IBM to build a state-of-the-art center for development and delivery of distance 
education. The result of this contract was a statc-of-thc-art satellite broadcast center, a 
commercial-quality television/video production center, three different kinds of advanced 
technology classrooms, two multimedia learning centers, a multimedia development center, a 
Regional Weather Information Center with its own broadcast systems, and a computer center 
with sufficient capacity for the storage and delivery of instructional material. All of these 
physical resources now stand ready to meet the tremendous training challenges of the aerospace 
community. 



THE NEED FOR THE AIRWAY SCIENCE NETWORK 

Presently there are forty-two colleges and universities around the country designated by 
the FAA as Airway Science Schools which offer undergraduate airway science programs. These 
institutions are shouldering the responsibility for preparing an ever-increasing portion of the 
work force, both in the private and public sector. There exists considerable variability in the size 
of these programs and in the manner in which instruction is presented-variability in the 
educational resources, in the material used, in methodologies employed, and in the professional 
preparation of the instructors. It is in the best interests of this industry and therefore directly in 
the national interest to maximize the quality of each of these many programs. In a national 
survey of airway science programs were recently contacted to ascertain their interest in 
participating in a distance education network. Of the 42 programs, over 30 responded to the 
survey and all respondents indicated a willingness and/or a need to participate in a distance 
education network for airway science subject matters. 

With increasingly powerful and more affordable computer and telecommunications 
technologies on the market, the enhancement of instruction in the aerospace disciplines through 
the use of emerging technology has never been more promising and feasible. The aerospace 
community has three unmet needs in this area. First, it needs timely, high-quality, and effective 
instruction delivered directly to the workplace and the classroom. Second, it needs high-quality 
examples and prototypes of the newest forms of instructional technology such as multimedia, 
hypermedia, intelligent tutoring systems, simulations, virtual environments, and performance 
support systems. Third, it needs to comprehensively and systematically study the effects of 
technology-based instruction on its learners so that training administrators and decision-makers 
can use these technology-based training resources more effectively to meet their training 
requirements. 



OPPORTUNITIES 

The acceptance and demand for distance education has exploded in the past few years, 
fueled by recent advances in signal compression technology and the need for just-in-time 
training. For example, the National Technological University, a satellite-based education 
network offering engineering and computer science graduate degrees, will soon expand from 
four to eight simultaneous channels of programming broadcast to over 40 universities and over 



2846 



350 companies around the country. In business television, the Law Enforcement Television 
Network, a satellite-based training network for law enforcement agencies, will reach out to over 
2500 subscribing agencies. The opportunity to provide this type of service to the aviation and 
aerospace industry has never been better. 

In higher education, the Airway Science Network has the potential to enhance the quality 
of instruction in colleges and universities in several signiflcant ways. First, it can provide 
courses to disadvantaged programs that they do not and cannot offer. Second, it can be used to 
provide the timely transmission of information to all airway science programs. Even the 
programs which do offer a full range of courses would bcneHt from the network's plan to offer 
daily weather, news, and information about current events in an industry which is constantly 
changing. Finally, it can be the catalyst for enhancing the sense of community among students, 
scholars, and industry professionals. Bringing together diverse groups of people from all over 
the nation into a common setting, to interact and to learn, will surely provide participants with 
the unparalleled opportunity to get to know others in the industry, and to be exposed to other 
ways of thinking and acting. 

The network provides an opportunity to assist the FAA in meeting its enormous training 
requirement, not only of its own employees but of the numerous industry professionals who 
require continual FAA certification and training. For example, it is reported that the FAA spends 
$750-$850 million to train its 52,000 plus work force. Last year, the FAA spent some $40 
million in travel and per diem expenses alone. By the year 2000, the 100 new systems which 
will be put into service will impose a tremendous training requirement to both government and 
industry. In addition to all of this, there are almost 700,000 pilots in the U.S. which require 
continual recurrent training. The Airway Science Network can lead the way in cutting the costs 
of this training through satellite delivery. 

The Airway Science Network will provide UND Aerospace with the opportunity to share 
its sizable array of intellectual resources, expertise, and vision to meet the training needs of the 
various sectors of the aviation industry. UND Aerospace employs over 70 full-time faculty in 
four academic departments—Aviation, Atmospheric Sciences, Computer Science, and Space 
Studies. In addition, the college employs over 140 full-time flight instructors and many other 
professional staff members involved in various ongoing research and development projects. 

The Department of Aviation is one of the leading and most comprehensive undergraduate 
programs in the country with some 50 courses in support of bachelors degrees in: 



Aviation Administration 
Airway Science Management 
Airway Computer Science 
Aircraft Systems Management 
Aviation Maintenance Management 



Airport Administrations 
Aeronautical Studies 
Air Transport 
Electronic Systems 
Air Traffic Control 



2847 



UND Aerospace maintains a modem 165,000 square foot flight training complex, 
complete with computerized dispatch service, flight planning rooms, self-study areas, instructor 
offices, bricnng rooms, and student lounges. Over 100 aircraft and simulators, including 13 
different types of airplanes and three types of helicopters, comprise one of the largest civilian 
training fleets in North America. 

UND Aerospace has established several of the finest research & development centers in 
the country. Engaged in numerous leading edge projects, these centers include: 

• Technolog y-Based Instruction Research Lab --an organization dedicated to the 
development, implementation, and evaluation of advanced forms of instructional 
technology in aerospace; currently oversees two (soon to be three) computer-based 
instruction labs. 

• High Altitude Chamber — a pressure chamber used to conduct training and research 
related the effect of high altitudes on human physiology. 

• Scientific Computing Center -the home of UND Aerospace's Cray AMP 
supercomputer; provides computing support to the college. 

• Earth Systems Science Institute -housed in $7 million facility; dedicated to the study 
and preservation of natural resources. 

• Regional Weather Information Center -a video production and broadcast studio 
dedicated to the delivery of weather information and forecasts. 

Finally, UND Aerospace enjoys one of the largest student populations of ab initio pilots 
and air traffic controllers of in the country, providing an ideal population for the research and test 
best for the research and evaluation initiatives to be undertaken by this Center. These students 
will also provide a valuable labor source for projects through internships and cooperative studies. 
There are currently 1 200 undergraduate majors in aviatibn, 60 undergraduate majors in 
atmospheric sciences, and 30 undergraduate majors in computer science. Computer science and 
space studies graduate programs have over 40 students. 

THE FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION SUPERCOMPUTER CENTER 

The University of Nonh Dakota is proposing that it house and operate the Federal 
Transportation Supercomputer Center (FTSQ, and is requesting $15.8 million in FY94 to fund the 
supercomputer equipment and support resources necessary to establish the FTSC. The FTSC will 
be dedicated to serving the research requirements of the various administrations within the United 
States Department of Transportation (DOT). It is anticipated that additional funds will be needed 
in FY95 to complete the FTSC supercomputer resource acquisition. 

Establishing the FTSC-and operating it at UND-will provide a series of primary benefits 
to the DOT: 



2848 



The FTSC will supply the DOT vAth access to state-of-the-art high performance 
computing resources for use in advanced research. Access to the simulation and 
modeling capabilides of a supercomputer is needed to enhance efforts by the DOT 
to improve the safety, security, and accessibility of the nation's transportation 
system. These resources will allow scientists within the DOT to conduct research 
and safety analyses in areas that are generally too complex, expensive, or 
dangerous to address in any other manner. Research supported by supercomputer- 
based models will assist DOT scientists in assessing the viability of emerging 
technologies, allowing the DOT to take advantage of technical advances in a timely 
and cost-effective manner. 

The FTSC will establish an environment in which the DOT can effectively employ 
advanced computing technology over a full range of application areas, ensuring 
effective distribution and use of these resources across all of the DOT . The value 
of supercomputing as an enabling technology for scientific advancement is well 
established throughout government and industry. The need for continuing 
improvements in transportation safety and effectiveness makes it essential that DOT 
researchers be able to widely apply supercomputing tools, and that their usage be 
. embedded in ongoing DOT research efforts. The FTSC will serve as the DOT's 
focal point for employing and understanding supercomputing technology. 

The FTSC will leverage the extensive DOT research experience and supercomputer 
support capabilities of UND, minimizing initial and ongoing costs, and ensuring 
effective operational support. UND is home to one of the nation's most advanced 
aviation schools, and has been engaged in many joint projects with DOT 
researchers, particularly in the Federal Aviation Administration. The existing 
scientific and computing support infrastructure at UND will help to maximize the 
DOT'S return on its technology investment and ensure a well-managed computing 
and research environment for the DOT's scientists. 



SUPERCOMPUTING APPLICATIONS IN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH 

The research projects to be supported by the Federal Transportation Supercomputer Center 
vary in scope and complexity, but focus on the DOT's mission of ensuring safe, efficient, secure 
and accessible transportation. In part, they encompass the following: 

THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

For the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the FTSC will provide the 
supercomputing resources necessary to support its proposed National Simulation 
Laboratory (NSL). The NSL will use computer simulation for advanced studies of 
air space capacity growth, air traffic control routing and airway conflict resolution, 
satellite navigation and communications nxxleling, landing system and airpon 



2849 

surface automation, aviation accident analysis and prevention, and enhanced 
aviation weather forecasting. 

As stated by the FAA R£&D Advisory Committee in a report to the FAA: 
"The NSL is necessary. It is of major importance to supp<nt the design and 
development of a safe and efficient ATC system for the twenty-first century by: 

• facilitating quicker acceptance of new ATC technologies; 

• demonstrating, testing, and validating promising concepts in an 
integrated National Airspace System (NAS) environment; 

• achieving more rapid development and deployment; 

• providing improved identification of future research needs; and 

• providing an enhanced mechanism for gaining early domestic and 
International acceptance of new procedures and equipment." 

The capabilities provided by the FTSC are integral to the full system 
prototyping desired by the FAA. For example, the FTSC supercomputers will 
allow FAA researchers to model and study interactions of system elements in an 
entire ATC flow nxxlel rather than a constrained, artificial prototype. Such insight 
is critical to the FAA's development of the future air traffic management system of 
the United States. Additionally, effective adaptation and timely deployment of new 
technologies, such as the Global Positioning System (GPS) high-precision 
navigation capability, can be significanUy enhanced through the use of full system 
prototyping simulations conducted on the FTSC supercomputers. The effective 
transfer of GPS technology from military application to the commercial aviation 
sector alone offers the Federal Government and civil users the opportunity to save 
millions of dollars when compared to the continued deployment of alternative, 
outmoded navigational systems. Supercomputer simulations will be necessary to 
ensure that this tiansfer is accomplished in a safe, timely, and effective manner, and 
at minimal expense to the Federal Government and civil aviation communities. 

Further, FTSC supercomputers will assist FAA researchers in developing 
advanced explosive detection devices, establishing Airworthiness Directives for 
aging aircraft, and fostering the design of safer and more efficient aircraft . As an 
example, supercomputer simulations conducted by the Boeing Company in 
cooperation with the FAA recentiy helped to uncover the cause of two incidents of 
engines being sheared from Boeing 747 cargo jets. The simulations, conducted on 
a Cray Research, Inc. supercomputer, helped researchers discover that the fuse pins 
which hold the engines to the wing react unexpeaedly under severe loads. A 
microscopic "crankshaft" effect, undetectable through traditional testing techniques, 
caused the fuse pins to experience sti^ss levels eight-to-ten times greater than 
previously anticipated. This so^ss magnified the effects of small, corrosive-related 
cracks, causing the fuse pins to fail. The supercomputing resources available 
through the FTSC will help ensure that FAA researchers can employ similar 
research techniques to evaluate aircraft component safety and effectiveness. 



2850 



THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAITIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION 

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) will be able 
to keep pace with the automobile manufacturers it monitors through the use of 
simulated crash and safety testing. Virtually every automobile manufacturer in the 
world uses supercomputer simulations for crashworthiness and rollover testing, 
saving tnillions of dollars in experimental costs and gaining insight beyond that 
available through actual physical tests. Use of the same technology by NHTSA 
will help validate experimental data and ensure uniform standards and compliance 
with safety measures throughout the automotive industry. Additionally, 
supercomputer simulation can assist NHTSA in the evaluation and development of 
Intelligent Vehicle/Highway Systems (IVHS) to improve the crash avoidance 
capabilities of motor vehicles. 

THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION 

In support of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the FTSC will 
facilitate environmental impact studies of noise and air pollution, as well as 
assessments of highway construction on wetlands and other natural resources. Use 
of the FTSC's supercomputers will also enhance the FHWA's Bridge Replacement 
and Rehabilitation Program, support advanced highway material development, and 
help speed the implementation of a prototype automated highway and vehicle 
system for the National Intelligent Vehicle Highway System Strategic Plan. 

THE FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION 

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) will be able to use the FTSC to 
conduct logistics analyses for raiht>ad management, safety, and modal fuel 
efficiency. Supercomputer-based simulations will be used to characterize and test 
mechanisms such as freight car roller bearings and wheel flaws, and will provide 
for enhanced analysis of the durability of complex track components under the 
strains caused by higher train speeds, heavier cars, and increasing traffic density. 
Additionally, high-speed rail and magnetic levitadon (maglev) technologies can be 
analyzed to help ensure the safety and accessibility of such systems as they are 
introduced into the United States. 

THE UNITED STATES COAST GUARD 

The United States Coast Guard (U.S. Coast Guard) will be able to access 
the FTSC supercomputers to more quickly analyze and direct the control of oil 
spills and other hazardous waste accidents. U.S. Coast Guard researchers will be 
able to combine supercomputer-based oceanographic weather models along with 
physical property models of spilled hazardous materials to predict their movement 
along coastlines, helping to direct cleanup and spill containment efforts. 



2851 

THE RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION 

Computational models employed at the FTSC will help Research and 
Special Programs Administration (RSPA) researchers analyze the material 
properties of oil and gas pipelines and related equipment. These studies will be 
used to develop safer designs and understand the stress and strain properties of 
aging pipeline materials. 

THE FTSC AND THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH DAKOTA 

The proposed Federal Transportation Supercomputer Center is to be housed at and operated 
by the Center for Aerospace Sciences (CAS) at the University of North Dakota. Access to the 
FTSC supercomputer systems will be provided to DOT researchers through high-speed network 
and satellite communications. On-site facilities are also available for visiting DOT researchers. 

The University of North Dakota is located in Grand Forks, North Dakota, near the 
Minnesota state border. The school is the state's oldest, largest and most diversified university. 
More than 12,000 students are enrolled in over 130 undergraduate and graduate programs. 

The Center for Aerospace Sciences (CAS) is UND's second largest college, with a student 
enrollment of over 2,200. As one of the nation's foremost aviadon and aerospace schools, (TAS 
maintains extensive transportation and aviation educational programs. CAS has conducted 
pioneering aviadon safety research in areas such as microburst windshear, aircraft icing, and 
severe stonti analysis, and fundamental CAS programs, such as the Airway Science curriculum, 
were developed joinUy with the FAA. 

CAS also operates the UND Scientific Computing Center, housed in a new state-of-the-art 
building and hosting a CRAY X-MP supercomputer. While the CRAY X-MP has been effective in 
supporting the academic research of UND scientists, meeting the extensive needs of DOT 
researchers will require an upgrade to more powerful parallel vector and massively parallel 
systems. By utilizing the established UND Scientific Computing Center, the DOT can 

• focus FTSC funding resources on supercomputers and related instrumentation 
rather than "bricks and mortar", providing the DOT with as powerful a technical 
resource as possible for its investment; and 

• take advantage of a physical plant which can readily accomnrodate the installation of 
supercomputer systems, ensuring the DOT that the FTSC can become an effective 
operational resource within a minimal a start-up period 

REQUESTED FUNDING AND USAGE ALLOCATION 

It is requested that a Federal Budget Appropriation of $15.8 million be made in FY94 to 
establish the FTSC and upgrade the parallel vector supercomputer resources already in place at 
UND. Further, it is expected that this initial funding request will be followed by a request of $6.9 



2852 



million in FY95 to add massively parallel processing resources to the FTSC. These funds will 
allow the purchase of supercomputer systems, networking capabilities, and support services 
commensurate with the needs of DOT research programs. They will also provide for the 
operations and maintenance of the supercomputers through FY96. 

In return for facilities management services and ongoing operation of the FTSC 
supercomputer systems, it is proposed that UND receive 30% of the available supercomputer cycle 
time and dau storage capacity, and that 70% of these resources be allocated for use by the DOT. 



CONCLUSION 

The research requirements of the DOT are extensive and varied. Through the simulation 
capabilities of supercomputers, DOT scientists can gain insight that is difficult or impossible to 
attain in any other fashion. Establishment of the Federal Transportation Supercomputer Center will 
promote continued improvements in the safety, accessibility, efficiency, and security of the United 
States transportation system. The experience of UND in supporting DOT research projects and 
operating an advanced supercomputer facility make it the ideal location at which to establish the 
FTSC. 



REFERENCES 

1- Concepts and Description of the Futu re Air Traffic Manaeement System for the 
United States . U.S. Depanment of Transportation, Federal Aviation 
Administration, April 1991. 

2. FAA National Simulati on Laboratory. A Report to the FAA RAD Committee . June 
26, 1990. 

3. Dr. Andres G. Zellweger. "FAA's National Simulation Capability." Journal of 
ATC. March 1993. 

4. "Computer Finds Excess Stress on 747 Paru," The Washinpton Post . April 1 1 , 
1993. 



LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND 
PREPARED STATEMENTS 



Page 

Alatorre, Richard, member, Los Angeles City Coimcil, prepared statement 2756 

American Association of Airport E!xecutives and the Aiiports Council Inter- 

national-Nortii America, prepared statement 2456 

American PubUc Transit Assoaation, prepared statement 2442 

Baker, Dr. Kendall, president, University of North Dakota, prepared state- 
ment 2844 

Bartels, Gerald L., president, Atlanta Chamber of Commerce, letter fi:t>m 2698 

Bower, Dwight, deputy director, Colorado Department of Transportation, pre- 
pared statement 2592 

Brown, Robert Clarke, senior vice president, Lehman Brothers, PubUc Fi- 
nance, America's Coalition for Transit NOW, prepared statement 2438 

Capon, Ross, executive director. National Association of Railroad Passengers, 

prepared statement 2488 

Citizens for Appropriate Rural Roads [CARR], prepared stetement 2709 

Collins, Rev. T. B^n, S.J., Georgetown University, prepared stetement 2625 

Dill, Mig. Randolph W., boating law administrator, Connecticut, National 
Association of State Boating Law Administrators, prepared stetement 2491 

Donohue, Thomas J., president and chief executive officer, American Trucking 
Associations, Inc., prepared stetement 2448 

Dupre, Wayne A, executive director, New Orleans Regional Transit Author- 
ity, prepared statement 2784 

Francis, Miles N., Jr., executive director, Jacksonville Transportetion Author- 
ity, prepared stetement 2750 

Garrison, WiUiam N., chairman. Policy Committee, Dallas-Forth Worth Rail- 

tran, prepared stetement 2587 

George, Rev. WiUiam L., S.J., Georgetown University, prepared stetement 2625 

Gibson, Lee G., planning coordinator, Clark County Regional Transportetion 

Commission, prepared stetement 2569 

Greater Orlando Aviation Authority, prepared stetement 2793 

Hood, Glenda E., mayor, Orlando, FL, prepared stetement 2819 

Howard, Pierre, Lieutenant Governor, Stete of Georgia, letter from 2696 

Illinois Department of Transportetion, prepared stetement 2699 

Ingle, Kathy, chairman of the board of directors, Dallas Area Rapid Transit 
Authority, prepared stetement 2573 

Jackson, Maynard, mayor, Atlante, GA, letter from 2697 

Ladd, Jefi&ey R., chairman, Metra Commuter Rail, prepared stetement 2540 

Leary, John K., Jr., executive director, Bi-Stete Development Agency, pre- 
pared stetement 2842 

Lt^g, Comdr. William E., USNR (Ret), director, naval affairs. Reserve Offi- 
cers Association of the United Stetes, prepared stetement 2497 

Lopez, Estela, Ph.D., vice president for academic affairs, Inter American 
University of Puerto Rico, prepared stetement 2746 

Magnuson, R. Gary, vice president. Center for Marine Conservation, prepared 

stetement 2463 

Memphis Area Transit Authority, prepared stetement 2767 

Meskill, Dr. Victor, president, Dovmng College, prepared stetement 2599 

(i) 



ii 

Page 

Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, prepared statement 2506 

Metropolitan Dade Coiinty, FL, prepared statement 2772 

Millar, William W., executive oirector, Port Authority of Allegheny County, 

prepared statement 2823 

Miller, Zell, Governor, State of Georgia, letter from 2695 

Mosena, David R., commissioner of aviation, Illinois Department of Aviation, 

prepared statement 2520 

National Air Transportation Association, prepared statement 2475 

O'Connor, Edward A., Jr., executive director. Spaceport Florida Authority, 
prepared statement 2837 

Pinter, Frank, executive director, Maryland Center for Independent Living, 
National Easter Seal Society, prepared statement 2494 

Raphael, David, executive director. Community Transportation Association 
of America, prepared statement 2472 

Remy, Ray, president, Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce, prepared 
statement 2763 

Schlickman, Stephen E., executive director, Central Area Circiilator Project, 

prepared statement 2523 

Seel, Georce N., assistant executive director, engineering and construction, 

Orlando International Airport, letter from 2796 

Shackelford, Wayne, conmussioner, Georgia Department of Transportation, 

prepared statement 2627 

Skoutelas, Paul, executive director. Lynx, prepared statement 2836 

Sliwa, Steven M., president, Embry-Ridale Aeronautical University, prepared 

statement 2607 

Stoltz, John, president. Advanced Navigation and Positioning Corp., prepared 

statement 2503 

Webb, Wellington E., mayor, Denver, CO, prepared statement 2590 

White, Franuin, chief executive officer, Los Angeles Cotinty Metropolitan 

Transportation Authority, prepared statement 2766 

Wilkinson, Wilbur D., tnbal cnairman. Fort Berthold Indian Reservation, 

prepared statement 2621 



BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY 




3 9999 05981 804 5 



ISBN 0-16-043973-6 





7801 60" 439735 



900